Dental fear and sense of coherence among 18‐yr‐old adolescents in <scp>F</scp>inland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim was to investigate whether dental fear was associated with the sense of coherence (SOC) among 18-yr-old adolescents (n = 777). Cross-sectional data from a prospective cohort of a random sample of families from Finland and their first-born children were used. Dental fear was measured using the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale and categorized as high dental fear for scores of 19-25 and as no to moderate dental fear for scores of 5-18. Sense of coherence was measured using a 13-item version of Antonovsky's Sense of Coherence Questionnaire, dichotomized as scores 13-63 for weak SOC and as scores of 64-91 for strong SOC. Gender and education were included as background factors in the logistic regression analyses. The prevalence of high dental fear was 8%. Those reporting high dental fear reported more often a weaker SOC than did those with no to moderate dental fear (69% vs. 31%, OR = 2.5, 95% CI = 1.4-4.4), also when adjusted for gender and education (OR = 2.2, 95% CI = 1.2-3.9). According to the theory of salutogenesis, as proposed by Antonovsky, SOC is a resource instrument especially in situations of tension or strain and hence a strong SOC might protect against high dental fear.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".