ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2026
Saliva as a Matrix for Primary Care: Feasibility and Scoping of Its Use for Assessment of Nutrition and Inflammation.
Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scarce laboratory capacity constrains both primary care and population surveillance for nutritional and inflammation assessment globally. One major contributing factor is the reliance on blood as the primary matrix, and its associated limitations of being invasive, having relatively lower acceptance in apparently healthy individuals and community settings, and being heavily dependent on laboratory and related infrastructure. Saliva offers a noninvasive, inexpensive, and more convenient alternative that causes less discomfort and has the potential to expand the portfolio of point-of-care testing for nutrition and inflammation assessment in primary care. We aimed to synthesize the evidence on the feasibility and scope of using salivary biomarkers for nutrition and inflammation assessment. A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and CINAHL, without restrictions on language, geographical location, or publication date. Screening and data extraction were done in duplicate on Covidence. A narrative synthesis was done to summarize the results. Seventy-six studies examining salivary biomarkers for nutrition and inflammation were identified across 26 countries, involving 5425 children and 5617 adults. We summarized the results from 33 studies assessing ferritin, iron, zinc, calcium, vitamin A, vitamin B-12, vitamin D, vitamin C, and vitamin E in saliva. Additionally, we found 43 studies evaluating salivary inflammatory biomarkers, including C-reactive protein, α-1 acid glycoprotein, hepcidin, immunoglobulin A, and cytokines within the context of nutritional impairments. Although most biomarker values were detectable in saliva, significant evidence and methodological gaps remain, including the absence of standardized protocols for sample collection, transportation, processing, storage, and laboratory analysis; insufficient information on diagnostic performance, accuracy, and comparability with corresponding blood biomarkers; and challenges in interpreting findings across different population subsets and settings. Future research should focus on improving method reporting and ensuring the clinical relevance of findings to maximize the potential of saliva-based diagnostics for nutrition and inflammation assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.