The Association Between Vitamin D and Early Childhood Caries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Previous surveys have reported that children with vitamin D deficiency were likely to suffer from early childhood caries (ECC). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine 1. whether the status of vitamin D is intrinsically related to the occurrence of ECC and 2. the optimal level of vitamin D for the prevention of ECC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The database of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase and Google scholar were searched for targeted literature. The eligibility criteria were observational studies in which children with ECC were compared to children without ECC in terms of their vitamin D status. Applying the Newcastle-Ottawa tool, study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed by 2 reviewers independently. Meta-analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.4 software. RESULTS: 501 articles were retrieved from the electronic databases; 11 studies were finally included in systematic review, 10 studies of which were submitted to meta-analysis. The 25(OH)D levels in the ECC group were statistically significantly lower compared with that in the caries-free group (WMD = -13.96, 95% CI: [-19.88,-8.03], p < 0.001), especially in regard to the association between S-ECC and vitamin D (WMD = -18.64, 95% CI: [-20.06,-17.22], p < 0.001). The subgroup analyses in terms of geographical region demonstrated that children with a level of 25(OH)D of 50-75 nmol/l were more likely to have ECC than those with over 75 nmol/l (OR = 1.42, 95% CI: [1.26,1.60], p < 0.001), with data from Asia and Europe combined for analysis Conclusions: The level of vitamin D was lower in children with ECC than in caries-free children, and the correlation between S-ECC and vitamin D was even stronger. The optimal 25(OH)D level for preventing occurrence and development of ECC was ≥ 75 nmol/l. Thus, clinicians should view the development of early caries also from a systemic perspective.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.041 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".