MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399917589 · doi:10.4317/medoral.26603

Association of vitamin D levels and oral lichen planus. Systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· es· W4399917589 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal · 2024
Typereview
Languagees
FieldDentistry
TopicOral Health Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOral lichen planusMeta-analysisDermatologyAssociation (psychology)MedicinePsychologyInternal medicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Oral lichen planus (OLP) is an inmuno-mediated mucocutaneous chronical inflammatory disease. Multiple predisposing factors are considered, such as autoimmune response, microorganisms, medications, dental materials, psychological stress, genetic predisposition or nutritional deficiencies. The deficiency of vitamin D has been related to various autoimmune diseases like OLP. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The electronic search was conducted in the MEDLINE (Pubmed), Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases. To assess any potential risk of bias, the authors critically appraised each study by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort and case-control studies. Pooled analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity of the studies was assessed by the I2 statistics. Forest Plots were performed to graphically represent the difference between vitamin D concentrations in the OLP compared to healthy group, with a 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: After applying our inclusion and exclusion criteria, 7 articles were included in our review. The median concentration vitamin D in ng/ml found in serum for patients with OLP was of 26,6311,75ng/ml and for healthy patients was of 31,438,7ng/ml. Regarding the quantitative analysis, 7 studies were included. The difference in the concentration of vitamin D in healthy patients and patients with OLP statistically significant (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD): -6.20, 95% CI: -11.24 to -1.15, p=0.02 and I2 heterogeneity: 94%, p<0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: The patients with OLP have statistically lower vitamin D levels than healthy patients.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0240.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.119
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it