Association of salivary proteins with dental caries in children with mixed dentition: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To review the current evidence on the association between salivary protein profile and dental caries in children during mixed dentition stage. METHODS: This systematic review followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Searches were run in PubMed, Scopus and Embase along with gray literature. The searches were limited to studies on humans, published from inception to February 2024. Observational studies exploring correlations between salivary proteins and caries in children during mixed dentition (6-13 years) were included. The methodological quality of included studies was analyzed independently by two reviewers using the Joanna Briggs checklist and Newcastle-Ottawa scale, respectively followed by a qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 17 primary studies were included. The studies recruited 1,330 subjects including 612 caries-active and 505 caries-free subjects. The total protein content was higher in caries-active subjects. Among the glycoproteins, IgA and MUC5B were higher in caries-free subjects while the levels of MUC7 were lower in the caries-free group. Antimicrobial peptides and proteinase-3 levels were also higher in caries-free subjects. Contradictory findings were reported for the association of α- amylase and carbonic anhydrase with caries status. The included studies were categorized as good quality (n = 4), fair quality (n = 12) and poor quality (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Based on fair-quality studies included in this review and within its limitations, the findings revealed that salivary proteins may be associated with susceptibility to dental caries in mixed dentition. Total salivary proteins are upregulated in caries-active subjects while salivary IgA, antimicrobial peptides and proteinase-3 are increased in caries-free subjects. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42024517374).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".