Table_1_The association of periodontal diseases and Sjogren’s syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.DOCX
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background<p>The relationship between periodontal diseases and Sjogren’s syndrome were found inconsistent in current studies. Our objective is to clarify the relationship between periodontal diseases and Sjogren’s syndrome.</p>Methods<p>A systematic review was performed and reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Electronic databases (EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, from inceptions until 24 November 2021) were searched. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) were applied to evaluate the quality of studies. Quality assessment of the certainty of evidence was performed based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines. When the output is the ratio, Odds ratio (OR) of periodontal diseases with Sjogren’s syndrome were calculated. When the output is the mean, weighted mean difference (WMD) of periodontal diseases with Sjogren’s syndrome was calculated. We conducted meta-analysis and estimated the pool sensitivity. Begg’s test was used to test the possibility of publication bias. We also carried out meta-regression to clarify the source of heterogeneity (I2 > 50%). Finally, we performed a trial sequential analysis (TSA) to identify the false positive or false negative outcomes that might occur during repeated updates.</p>Results<p>21 studies were included in this systematic review, with a total of 11435 subjects. Meta-analysis of 5 studies showed that there is a positive correlation between periodontitis and Sjogren’s syndrome (OR = 2.12, 95% CI = 1.43–3.17; 5 studies, 6927 participants; low certainty of evidence). Meta-analysis of 16 studies showed that the periodontal condition of patients with Sjogren’s syndrome was worse compared with the control group, and the scores of clinical periodontal parameters were relatively high.</p>Conclusion<p>Sjogren’s syndrome patients seem to be more likely to be diagnosed with periodontal diseases. However, our results should be interpreted with caution considering the high heterogeneity.</p>Systematic review registration<p>[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42021261322].</p>
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 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".