Cited by 197

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Candida albicans and Early Childhood Caries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Xiao, Jin, Huang, Xuelian, Alkhers, Naemah, Alzamil, Hassan, Alzoubi, Sari, Wu, Tong Tong, Castillo, Daniel A., Campbell, Frank, Davis, Joseph, Herzog, Karli, Billings, Ronald, Kopycka-Kedzierawski, Dorota T., Hajishengallis, Evlambia, Koo, Hyun·2018·Caries Research

Abstract

Oral Candida albicans has been detected in children with early childhood caries (ECC) and has demonstrated cariogenic traits in animal models of the disease. Conversely, other studies found no positive correlation between C. albicans and caries experience in children, while suggesting it may have protective effects as a commensal organism. Thus, this study aimed to examine whether oral C. albicans is associated with ECC. Seven electronic databases were searched. The data from eligible studies were extracted, and the risk of bias was evaluated. A fixed effects model (Mantel-Haenszel estimate) was used for meta-analysis, and the summary effect measure was calculated by odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Fifteen cross-sectional studies were included for the qualitative assessment and 9 studies for meta-analysis. Twelve studies revealed higher oral C. albicans prevalence in ECC children than in caries-free children, while 2 studies indicated an equivalent prevalence. A pooled estimate, with OR = 6.51 and 95% CI = 4.94-8.57, indicated a significantly higher ECC experience in children with oral C. albicans than those without C. albicans (p < 0.01). The odds of experiencing ECC in children with C. albicans versus children without C. albicans were 5.26 for salivary, 6.69 for plaque, and 6.3 for oral swab samples. This systematic review indicates that children with oral C. albicans have >5 times higher odds of having ECC compared to those without C. albicans. Further prospective cohort studies are needed to determine whether C. albicans could be a risk factor for ECC, and whether it is dependent on different sample sources (saliva/plaque).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000481833

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. 10.1177/00220345950740050301 · DOI
  2. 10.4103/0976-9668.107257 · DOI
  3. 10.4317/jced.51242 · DOI
  4. 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1999.tb03268.x · DOI
  5. 10.1128/IAI.00087-14 · DOI
  6. 10.1128/AEM.05203-11 · DOI
  7. 10.1590/1516-3180.2014.1322640 · DOI
  8. 10.1111/omi.12152 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1034/j.1399-302X.2003.00086.x · DOI
  10. 10.1007/5584_2016_5 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2004.07.004 · DOI
  12. 10.1177/0022034515573272 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1038/srep41332 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1159/000324809 · DOI
  15. 10.1159/000204911 · DOI
  16. 10.1080/00016357.2016.1244560 · DOI
  17. 10.1159/000047482 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1159/000047482 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1371/journal.ppat.1003616 · DOI
  20. 10.1590/S1517-74912001000300003 · DOI
  21. 10.17796/1053-4628-39.3.209 · DOI
  22. 10.1046/j.0933-7407.2003.00888.x · DOI
  23. 10.1111/odi.12691 · DOI
  24. 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2008.02.015 · DOI
  25. 10.1186/s12903-015-0134-3 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00012-9 · DOI
  27. 10.1159/000314675 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/j.cden.2016.11.002 · DOI
  29. 10.1038/ismej.2014.73 · DOI
  30. 10.1111/j.1439-0507.2009.01719.x · DOI
  31. 10.7860/JCDR/2016/19387.8357 · DOI
  32. 10.1093/femspd/ftw039 · DOI
  33. 10.4238/2015.January.30.18 · DOI
  34. 10.1371/journal.pone.0164242 · DOI
  35. 10.1111/omi.12049 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2012.05.012 · DOI
  37. 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1002-0098.2016.05.003 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Xiao, J., Huang, X., Alkhers, N., Alzamil, H., Alzoubi, S., Wu, T. T., Castillo, D. A., Campbell, F., Davis, J., Herzog, K., Billings, R., Kopycka-Kedzierawski, D. T., Hajishengallis, E., & Koo, H.
Venue
Caries Research
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2017-12-21
Volume
52
Issue
1-2
Pages
102-112
ISSN
  • 0008-6568
  • 1421-976X
Cited by
197
References
3
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review