MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7073699760

Características odontológicas e prevalência da ardência bucal em doentes com diabetes mellitos do tipo 2

2009· article· pt· W7073699760 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAmericanae (AECID Library) · 2009
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOral cavityDiabetes mellitusPeriodontal diseaseBurning mouth syndromeOrofacial painPeripheral neuropathy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O Diabetes mellitus (DM) é o transtorno endócrino mais comum e afeta 6% da população mundial. A neuropatia diabética é uma das complicações do DM e acomete até 60% dos doentes diabéticos. Este é um estudo descritivo que teve como objetivo avaliar as condições odontológicas e a prevalência da ardência bucal nos doentes diabéticos tipo 2 com neuropatia diabética. Foram utilizados os seguintes instrumentos de avaliação: exame sensitivo padronizado da face (algiometria), questionário RDC/TMD eixos 1 e 2, (critérios de diagnóstico em pesquisa) para o diagnóstico de disfunção temporomandibular (DTM), protocolo de avaliação de dor orofacial (EDOF-HC), questionário McGill para avaliação de dor e exame periodontal (IS índice de sangramento, PCS profundidade clínica de sondagem, PCI profundidade clínica de inserção). A prevalência de dor orofacial foi 55,2% e de ardor bucal foi 17,2%. Os valores de glicemia em jejum e HbA1c apresentaram-se acima dos valores normais. Dos doentes avaliados, 44,8% eram totalmente desdentados, 41,2% dos doentes apresentaram doença periodontal avançada, prevalência de dor miofascial mastigatória foi 31%. Traços de depressão moderada e grave e de sintomas físicos inespecíficos moderados e graves foram encontrados em 51,7% dos doentes, de incapacidade baixa e moderada em 37,9%. Observou-se comprometimento da sensibilidade dolorosa em V2 lado D (p=0,007), correlacionada com os valores de HbA1c.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.193 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmericanae (AECID Library)Same topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207