MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096997289

Survey of diabetes knowledge and practices of dental hygienists.

2008· article· en· W2096997289 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda D. Boyd, Michele L Hartman-Cunningham

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicinePeriodontologyDiabetes mellitusPopulationDiseaseIncidence (geometry)ConfusionHealth careQuarter (Canadian coin)MEDLINEGerontologyDentistryEnvironmental healthPsychologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Increasing incidence of diabetes in the United States and risk for more severe periodontal disease in individuals with poorly controlled diabetes make it essential to provide access to education to prepare oral health providers to care for this population. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this survey was to assess the dental hygienist's diabetes knowledge, beliefs concerning the disease, and clinical practices to identify professional continuing education needs. analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to determine if significant differences existed in the amount of muscle activity generated with each fulcrum. METHODS: A 5-part survey was constructed using the American Diabetes Association 2007 Clinical Practice Guidelines and the American Association of Periodontology Commissioned Review of diabetes and periodontal disease. Invitations to participate were disseminated electronically to American Dental Hygienists' Association (ADHA) members. A convenience sample of dental hygienists (n=392) representing 48 states participated. RESULTS: The majority of the respondents were female (99%), ages 41 to 60 (60.1%), and in practice more than 16 years (58.3%). Major deficits in knowledge were associated with the patient's hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) value and implications for diabetes control (50%). The survey responses indicated confusion about the current classifications of diabetes with 70% of respondents using classifications that are no longer recognized. Seventy-five to 90% of participants were unfamiliar with the impact of various types of diabetes medications on dental care. CONCLUSIONS: Dental hygienists in this survey demonstrated a need for enhancing knowledge about diabetes as it applies to clinical patient care. The areas of greatest need included the American Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines for standards of care, diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, medications, and best practices for interacting with other health professionals when caring for people with diabetes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOral microbiology and periodontitis researchFrench-language works237,207