Effectiveness of Maternal Counseling in Reducing Caries in Cree Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This cluster-randomized pragmatic (effectiveness) trial tested maternal counseling based on Motivational Interviewing (MI) as an approach to control caries in indigenous children. Nine Cree communities in Quebec, Canada were randomly allocated to test or control. MI-style counseling was delivered in test communities to mothers during pregnancy and at well-baby visits. Data on outcomes were collected when children were 30 months old. Two hundred seventy-two mothers were recruited from the 5 test and 4 control communities. Baseline characteristics were comparable but not equivalent for both groups. At trial's end, 241 children had follow-up. The primary analysis outcome was enamel caries with substance loss (d2); no statistically significant treatment effect was detected. Prevalence of treated and untreated caries at the d2 level was 76% in controls vs. 65% in test (p = 0.17). Exploratory analyses suggested a substantial preventive effect for untreated decay at or beyond the level of the dentin, d3 (prevalences: 60% controls vs. 35% test), and a particularly large treatment effect when mothers had 4 or more MI-style sessions. Overall, these results provide preliminary evidence that, for these young, indigenous children, an MI-style intervention has an impact on severity of caries (clinical trial registration ISRCTN41467632).
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".