Does Patient Age Impact In-Office Tooth Bleaching Outcomes? A Parallel Clinical Trial
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the influence of patient age on tooth sensitivity, bleaching effectiveness, and the self-perception and psychosocial impact of dental esthetics following in-office tooth bleaching with 35% hydrogen peroxide. METHODS: This parallel study categorized 56 subjects by age into early adulthood (18-25 years) and middle-aged (40-65 years) groups. The bleaching agent was applied in a single 45-minute session, spanning two bleaching sessions at a 1-week interval. Bleaching effectiveness assessment used upper incisors and canines. A shade guide (VITA Bleachedguide 3D-MASTER) and a portable spectrophotometer evaluated color changes. A visual analog scale and verbal rating scale recorded tooth sensitivity during and up to 48 hours after the bleaching procedure. The Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire measured the self-perception and psychosocial impact of the bleaching protocol. Student t-test, Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney, multivariate analysis of variance, chi-square, two-way repeated measures analysis of variance, and the Wilcoxon test (α=0.05) verified the data. RESULTS: Early adulthood subjects demonstrated a significant increase (17%) in the risk of tooth sensitivity (p=0.038), and the highest pain levels occurred 1 hour after the bleaching session (p<0.01). Nonetheless, early adulthood subjects showed improved bleaching effects 30 days after the procedure when compared to the middle-aged subjects, even though the overall perception of the psychosocial impact of dental esthetics was more evident in middle-aged subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Patient age influenced in-office bleaching outcomes. Both age groups reported esthetic satisfaction, but early adulthood subjects (18-25 years) experienced a more substantial whitening effect, greater dentin sensitivity, and higher psychological impact. Conversely, middle-aged subjects (40-65 years) had a better overall perception of the psychosocial impact of dental esthetics.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it