Genetic polymorphisms associated with developmental defects of enamel: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Polymorphisms in genes related to enamel formation and mineralization may increase the risk of developmental defects of enamel (DDE). AIM: To evaluate the existing literature on genetic polymorphisms associated with DDE. DESIGN: This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42018115270). The literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO, Cochrane Library, and in the gray literature. Observational studies assessing the association between DDE and genetic polymorphism were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and forty-six articles were identified, and 28 met the inclusion criteria. Five studies presented a low risk of bias. Ninety-two genes related to enamel development, craniofacial patterning morphogenesis, immune response, and hormone transcription/reception were included. Molar-incisor hypomineralization (MIH) and/or hypomineralization of primary second molars (HPSM) were associated with 80 polymorphisms of genes responsible for enamel development, immune response, morphogenesis, and xenobiotic detoxication. A significant association was found between the different clinical manifestations of dental fluorosis (DF) with nine polymorphisms of genes responsible for enamel development, craniofacial development, hormonal transcription/reception, and oxidative stress. Hypoplasia was associated with polymorphisms located in intronic regions. CONCLUSION: MIH, HPSM, DF, and hypoplasia reported as having a complex etiology are significantly associated with genetic polymorphisms of several genes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".