Impact of an Oral Health Education Workshop on Parents’ Oral Health Knowledge, Attitude, and Perceived Behavioral Control among African Immigrants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose. To evaluate the impact of an educational workshop on parental knowledge, attitude, and perceived behavioral control regarding their child’s oral health.Materials and Methods. A one-time oral health education workshop including audio/visual and hands-on components was conducted by a trained dentist and bilingual community workers in community locations. Participants were African parents of children who had lived in Canada for less than ten years. The impact of the workshop was evaluated by a questionnaire developed based on the theory of planned behavior.Results. A total of 105 parents participated in this study. Participants were mainly mothers (mean age 35.03±5.4 years) who came to Canada as refugee (77.1%) and had below high school education (70%). Pairedt-test showed a significant difference in participants’ knowledge of caries, preventive measures, and benefits of regular dental visits after the workshop (Pvalu e<0.05 ). A significant improvement was also found in parental attitudes toward preventive measures and their perceived behavioral control ( P<0.05 ). Parents’ intention to take their child to a dentist within six months significantly altered after the workshop (Pvalu e<0.05 ).Conclusions. A one-time hands-on training was effective in improving parental knowledge, attitude, perceived behavioral control, and intention with respect to their child’s oral health and preventive dental visits in African immigrants.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".