Children’s self-reported pain at the dentist
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study is to get an insight into the pain report of children over two sequential dental visits. Furthermore, it was studied whether age, previous dental experience, level of dental anxiety and injection site were of influence on the self-reported pain of children during the first and second treatment session. One hundred and forty-seven children (4-11 years old) were included in the study. After receiving a local anesthesia injection prior to their dental treatment, they were asked how much pain they had felt. The level of dental anxiety was measured once by the parental version of the Dental Subscale of the Children's Fear Survey Schedule. Young children with a low level of dental anxiety show a sensitized reaction trend for self-reported pain over two sequential dental visits. Young children with a high level of dental anxiety reported the most pain on the first treatment session. For the older children, the children having previous dental experience gave the highest pain ratings on the first treatment session. Furthermore, for both young and older children the amount of pain reported for the second injection was best predicted by the amount of pain reported for the first injection, whereby higher scores the first time predict higher scores the second time. In conclusion, the memory of previous experience with dentistry and earlier treatment sessions seems of great influence on the behaviour and the experience of children during subsequent treatment sessions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it