Ocular health practices by dental surgeons in Southern Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dental professionals are among the occupational groups that experience ocular injuries and problems as they perform their daily dental works. The purpose of the study was to determine the ocular health practices by dental surgeons in Southern Nigeria. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted on dental surgeons working in Southern Nigerian tertiary oral healthcare centers using self-developed validated questionnaire as the tool of data collection. RESULTS: Of the 148 respondents, 27 (18.2%) rated their ocular health as poor/fair. More than half 82 (55.4%) of the respondents have undergone professional eye examination with a quarter 20 (24.3%) of them having received it, in the last 6 months. Symptomatic care was the major reason for the last visit. Medicated glasses use was found to be significantly associated with perception of ocular health and receipt of professional eye examination. A total of 32 (21.6%) and 2 (1.4%) of the respondents reported non-use of eye goggles and face mask respectively. Non-availability and associated visual clarity with goggle use were the main inhibitor to the regular safety eye goggles use among the respondents. The main suggested ways among the respondents of improving goggle use were training and provision of goggles free of charge for dental surgeons. Only 32 (21.6%) of the respondents would be uncomfortable reminding their colleagues on need to use safety eye goggle while attending to patients. CONCLUSION: Data from this study revealed that a significant proportion of the respondents rated the ocular health as excellent/good and do not regularly indulge in eye safety practices. Implementation of recommendation by the respondents may improve occupational eye safety among dental surgeons in Southern Nigeria.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".