Impact of oral hygiene on oral health‐related quality of life of preschool children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of oral hygiene of preschool children and parental attitude on children's oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 396 children of Shiraz kindergartens were selected by a randomized cluster sampling. Children's oral hygiene was assessed using the Simplified Debris Index (DI-S) and a self-made questionnaire about oral hygiene habits. Children's OHRQoL was evaluated by the Farsi version of Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (F-ECOHIS). The effect of oral hygiene determinants on OHRQoL was measured using Pearson and Spearman correlation, independent-sample t-test and anova. RESULTS: Children's mean DI-S and F-ECOHIS scores were 1.19 (± 0.77) and 19.36 (±8.42), respectively. Only 75% of the children had their teeth brushed once a day or more, and in 28%, toothbrushing had started before 2 years of age. DI-S values (P < 0.001) and frequency of toothbrushing (P < 0.001) had a statistically significant impact on OHRQoL of the children. Children's OHRQoL was also significantly associated with parents' attitude towards the importance of brushing deciduous teeth (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Oral health status of preschool children in Shiraz was less than optimal and had a significant impact on their OHRQoL. Therefore, improvement of children's OHRQoL could be achieved by improving their home dental care. Strategies promoting parental attitude about the importance of children's toothbrushing may significantly influence children's oral hygiene and are highly recommended.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".