Cognitive status and periodontitis: Is there a correlation? A cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is the most accurate cognitive screening tool for early diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, the majority of research on the correlation between MCI and periodontitis has been conducted using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to determine a possible correlation between the gingival index (GI), periodontitis staging and MCI as evaluated by the MoCA in adults aged ≥55 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 Mexican patients with or without periodontal disease who met the selection criteria were included in this cross-sectional study. A comprehensive clinical and radiographic evaluation was conducted to determine the periodontal status of all patients. The MoCA was applied to assess cognitive impairment. Descriptive statistics and logistic model-based multivariate statistical analyses were performed to identify variables associated with MCI. RESULTS: The cognitive status of subjects aged ≥55 years with and without periodontitis was mildly impaired in more than half of the studied sample. Thirty-four patients were diagnosed as periodontally healthy (group 1), 48 were diagnosed with mild to moderate periodontitis (group 2; stages I and II), and 38 had severe periodontitis (group 3; stages III and IV); 54% of the subjects exhibited MCI, mostly in groups 2 and 3. A negative correlation was observed between GI and MCI (p = 0.025). Other prognostic variables associated with MCI were loss of clinical attachment level (CAL) (odds ratio (OR) = 1.68 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-2.68)), sex and education level. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential clinical relevance of gingival and periodontal parameters, such as GI and CAL, and their association with MCI in patients of advanced age.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".