ArticleScientific reports2024
Development of a novel tongue biofilm index using bacterial biofluorescence.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Halitosis.International dental journal · 2026Guideline
- Association between red biofluorescence and microbial dysbiosis in cariogenic biofilms: an in vitro study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Oral microbiome-metabolome axis links glycerophospholipid dysregulation to Alzheimer's disease.Journal of oral microbiology · 2026Article
- Tongue coating, severity of Ama, and disease activity in patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A pilot study.Journal of Ayurveda and integrative medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conventional methods for assessing tongue bacterial biofilms have low inter-examiner reliability due to visualization challenges. This study aimed to develop and assess a novel Tongue Biofilm Fluorescence Index (TBFI) for the accurate detection and objective evaluation of the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of tongue biofilms at the chairside. Data were collected from 81 elderly individuals (n = 162 images). Qraycam captured white-light and fluorescence images of the dorsal tongue, and two examiners assessed tongue coating (TC) using the TBFI. The TBFI was calculated based on biofilm intensity and coverage (0-2 scale). Inter-examiner agreement (Kappa) was compared with the Winkel's Tongue Coating Index (WTCI) and the Oho Index. Validity was evaluated through correlations with hydrogen sulfide (H₂S) and methyl mercaptan (CH₃SH) levels. TBFI demonstrated the highest inter-examiner reliability (TBFI, κ = 0.752; WTCI, κ = 0.317; Oho Index, κ = 0.496), particularly for thickness rating (agreement rate: TBFI, 96.3%; WTCI, 76.5%; Oho Index, 79.6%). H₂S and CH₃SH concentrations showed significant positive correlations with all three indices, with the highest correlation observed between H₂S and TBFI (TBFI, r = 0.369; WTCI, r = 0.304; Oho Index, r = 0.308; p < 0.01). Furthermore, H₂S levels increased significantly with higher TBFI scores (p < 0.0001). TBFI shows enhanced reliability and validity, supporting its clinical potential.
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.