ArticleClujul medical (1957)2017
Assessment of the correlations between nicotine dependence, exhaled carbon monoxide levels and oral hygiene status: an observational study.
Article in Clujul medical (1957), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral Mucosal Lesions' propensity as an Outcome Eventuated by Exhaled Carbon Monoxide (CO) Levels and Nicotine Dependency.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimCigarette smoking has negative effects on general health, including oral health. The aim of our study was to assess the correlations between nicotine dependence, exhaled carbon monoxide levels and oral hygiene status.
methodsSmoker and non-smoker participants were enrolled in this observational study. The Fagerström test was used to classify nicotine dependences: low (score: 0-3), medium (score: 4-6) or high (score: 7-10). The oral hygiene status was classified according to the oral hygiene indices of plaque, calculus and gingival inflammation. Lastly, the exhaled carbon monoxide levels were measured with a MicroSmokelyzer (Bedfont Scientific Ltd., Kent, United Kingdom).
resultsSixty five participants (50 smokers in the study group and 15 non-smokers in the control group) were enrolled between 11th and 29th of January 2016. No statistical differences were observed between the study group and the control group in terms of age (mean age±SD 23.5±1.9 and 24.0±1.5, respectively) or gender (50% and 26.6%, respectively). A statistically significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of plaque, (p=0.036), calculus (p=0.001) and gingival indices (p<0.001). A positive correlation was found between the exhaled levels of carbon monoxide and the general Fagerström score (r=0.97, p<0.001) or the Fagerström score in smokers (r=0.93, p<0.001); a negative correlation was observed between the exhaled carbon monoxide levels and the number of tooth brushings daily (r=-0.41, p=0.001). The plaque index was statistically significantly associated with the exhaled carbon monoxide levels (p=0.008), general Fagerström score (p=0.016) and number of tooth brushings daily (p<0.001). The calculus and gingival indices were statistically significantly associated with the exhaled carbon monoxide levels (p<0.001), general Fagerström score (p<0.001) and score in smoker participants (p=0.029 and p=0.001, respectively) as well as the number of tooth brushings daily (p<0.001).
conclusionOur study found a significant association between the plaque, calculus and gingival indices and smoking. Moreover, nicotine dependence was significantly associated with the number of daily tooth brushings and the gingival index.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.