Iron Deficiency Anemia and Dental Caries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. To evaluate the evidence regarding the association between iron deficiency anemia (IDA) and dental caries in children and adolescents. Methods. Searches were conducted in 4 international databases from the beginning of records until October 2023. Studies evaluating the association between IDA and dental caries in individuals aged 6 months to 18 years were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Quantitative synthesis was performed using the inverse variance or Mantel-Haenzel method, depending on the type of outcome analyzed. Measures of association included odds ratios and mean differences, employing a random-effects model with a 95% confidence interval. Results. A total of 1161 studies were identified, of which 12 were selected for qualitative review and 9 for meta-analysis. A significant association was found between IDA and dental caries (odds ratio of 3.54; 95% CI: 2.54-4.94) and a higher rate of dental caries in the presence of IDA (mean difference of 1.96; 95% CI: 1.07-2.85). The certainty of evidence according to GRADE was rated as very low. Conclusions. Despite the limited certainty, the findings indicate a significant association between IDA and dental caries. It is prudent to interpret these results with caution, considering the methodological limitations of the studies. However, given the potential relevance of this association for public health, recommending oral health strategies, including preventive and corrective dental interventions, for anemia control programs underlines the importance of more rigorous future research to strengthen the certainty of the evidence and guide the implementation of these strategies.
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 | 0.016 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".