Evaluation of Linked Determinants Between Diabetes and Caries

Dental caries and diabetes mellitus, represent two chronic diseases of public health that present statistics of high prevalence worldwide. One of the main problems that affect these conditions is demography, since the least developed countries are those that have less access to public health services and are limited by the economic costs that represent the treatments. In this work is presented the univariate analysis, of a set of demographic determinants obtained from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES), in order to identify those that present the most significant information related to estimation of these diseases. According to the results, the age of the subjects is the main determinant describing the simultaneous presence of these diseases, obtaining an area under the curve (AUC) value ≥ 0.846, concluding that age can be used as tool for their preventive diagnosis

Registered Replication Report: Strack, Martin, & Stepper (1988)

According to the facial feedback hypothesis, people\u2019s affective responses can be influenced by their own facial expression (e.g., smiling, pouting), even when their expression did not result from their emotional experiences. For example, Strack, Martin, and Stepper (1988) instructed participants to rate the funniness of cartoons using a pen that they held in their mouth. In line with the facial feedback hypothesis, when participants held the pen with their teeth (inducing a \u201csmile\u201d), they rated the cartoons as funnier than when they held the pen with their lips (inducing a \u201cpout\u201d). This seminal study of the facial feedback hypothesis has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the results of 17 independent direct replications of Study 1 from Strack et al. (1988), all of which followed the same vetted protocol. A meta-analysis of these studies examined the difference in funniness ratings between the \u201csmile\u201d and \u201cpout\u201d conditions. The original Strack et al. (1988) study reported a rating difference of 0.82 units on a 10-point Likert scale. Our meta-analysis revealed a rating difference of 0.03 units with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 120.11 to 0.16. \ua9 2016, \ua9 The Author(s) 2016