Oral Health Knowledge of Pregnant Women on Pregnancy Gingivitis and Children's Oral Health
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
OBJECTIVE: Pregnancy gingivitis and early childhood caries remain prevalent in Hong Kong. The aim of this study was to assess pregnant women's knowledge and beliefs related to pregnancy gingivitis and children's oral health. STUDY DESIGN: An outreach survey was carried out in a clinic that provided antenatal examination. A written oral health questionnaire related to pregnancy gingivitis and early childhood caries was administered to pregnant women. Of the 106 pregnant women who enrolled in the study, 100 completed the questionnaires. RESULTS: Among the 100 subjects, only 39% correctly identified that hormonal changes contribute to pregnancy gingivitis. Only 36% identified red and swollen gums as signs of gingivitis. Furthermore, 53% of the surveyed pregnant women were not sure about the amount of toothpaste to administer to a child aged 18 months to 5 years. Almost 50% assumed that a replanted avulsed tooth would probably not survive within a short extra-alveolar period of less than 60 minutes. CONCLUSION: Prenatal women generally lack knowledge of a common oral disease that occurs during pregnancy and of what constitutes adequate oral health care for children. Oral health care education should be implemented as part of a prenatal care program.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it