ArticleBMC oral health2025
Impact of hormonal phases on salivary characteristics and oral hygiene in women: a cross-sectional comparative study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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.
- Translating microbial dysbiosis into brain health interventions: a focus on the oral-gut-reproductive inflammatory pathways.Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHormonal fluctuations across a woman's life stages can influence systemic and oral health. However, comparative data on salivary characteristics and oral hygiene across different hormonal phases remain limited. This study aimed to evaluate the salivary flow rate, salivary pH, and oral hygiene status among women in the menstruating, mid-cycle (ovulatory phase), pregnant-third trimester, and menopausal phases.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, 80 women (n=20 per group: mid-cycle (ovulatory phase), menstruating, pregnant-third trimester, menopausal) were examined. Unstimulated salivary flow (mL/5 min) and pH were measured; oral hygiene was assessed with the OHI-S. Outcomes were analyzed by ANCOVAwith age as a covariate. When omnibus effects were significant, Tukey-adjusted pairwise comparisons of estimated marginal means (EMMs) were performed. Effect sizes are reported as partial eta-squared (η²p) values; salivary flow is reported as mL/min for interpretability.
resultsAfter adjusting for age, salivary flow differed by group (F=92.10, p<0.001; η²p=0.787). The adjusted means (mL/min) were as follows: mid-cycle 0.831, menstruating 0.912, pregnant 0.427, and menopausal 0.460; menstruating and mid-cycle were greater than pregnant and menopausal (all p<0.001), with no difference between pregnant and menopausal women (p=0.980). Salivary pH also differed (F=16.55, p<0.001, η²p=0.398): mid-cycle 7.65, menstruating 7.63, pregnant 6.93, menopausal 6.63; cycling groups exceeded pregnant and menopausal (most p<0.01), whereas mid-cycle vs menstruating and pregnant vs menopausal groups were not significant. Age was not associated with flow (p=0.931) or pH (p=0.843). Oral hygiene categories differed by group (Fisher's exact p<0.001), with poorer hygiene in pregnant and menopausal women. However, the cross-sectional design precludes causal inference, findings are restricted to third-trimester pregnancies, and unmeasured factors such as oral hygiene, diet, socioeconomic status, and medication use may have influenced outcomes.
conclusionsThe study indicates that hormonal phases, particularly third-trimester pregnancy and menopause, are associated with reduced salivary flow, lower pH, and poorer oral hygiene, underscoring the need for stage-specific preventive strategies and collaboration between gynecologists and dental professionals.
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.