MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408152452 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v17n2p30

Dental Pocket and Type 2 Diabetes among Elderly People Aged 88 in Japan - Report on Improvements to Analytical Methods

2025· article· en· W4408152452 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mie Komoto, Satoshi Toyokawa, Keiichi Tonai, Tadashi Furuhata, Yukie Yanagisawa

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGerontologyType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to clarify the relationship between periodontal pocket depth and type 2 diabetes in individuals aged 88. We re-examined the relationship between periodontal pockets and type 2 diabetes in 508 older adults aged 88 years, excluding those individuals without residual teeth or teeth available for periodontal pocket measurement. METHODS: The subjects of this study were individuals who underwent dental check-ups in Matsudo city for individuals aged 88 years. We performed binomial logistic regression analyses to examine the association of presence of periodontal pockets and type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: Logistic regression analyses with covariates showed a significant association between deep periodontal pockets and type 2 diabetes in the continuous teeth model (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.23–4.16) and in the teeth categorical model (OR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.22–3.44). The results were almost identical to the original findings. CONCLUSION: A significant association was identified between periodontal pockets and an increased prevalence of type 2 diabetes among 508 Japanese individuals aged 88 years, after excluding those without residual teeth or teeth eligible for periodontal pocket measurement. These findings closely align with the original results and reinforce the importance of promoting dental check-ups, highlighting the role of oral hygiene in preventive healthcare even for those aged 88.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.397 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicTraditional Chinese Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207