MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124554265 · doi:10.22605/rrh1368

Prevalence and risk factors for parental-reported oral health of Inuit preschoolers: Nunavut Inuit Child Health Survey, 2007-2008

2010· article· en· W2124554265 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Angela Pacey, Tanya Nancarrow, Grace M. Egeland

Bibliographic record

VenueRural and Remote Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental healthMedicineChild healthDemographyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Studies from the early 20th Century suggest that Inuit had a low prevalence of dental caries.However, Inuit children now experience a high prevalence of tooth decay and dental caries.The main objectives of this study were to provide an estimate of the prevalence and correlates of parental-reported oral health among Inuit preschool-aged children in Nunavut.Methods: Inuit preschool-aged children aged 3 to 5 years from 16 of Nunavut's 25 communities were randomly selected to participate in the Nunavut Inuit Child Health Survey conducted in 2007 and 2008.The parent/primary caregiver was asked to give written informed consent for their child's participation.Caregivers were asked to rate their child's oral and dental health and if their child had any 'decayed, extracted or filled baby teeth': an affirmative response designated a child as having reported-caries experience (RCE).Interviewer administered questionnaires included household characteristics, nutritional supplements, past-month qualitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ), and a 24 hour dietary recall with repeat 24 hour recalls on a 20% sub-sample.Results: The overall participation rate was 72.3% (388 children).Among the participating children, 53% percent were female and the mean age was 4.4 ± 0.9 years.The weighted prevalence of RCE was 69.1% (95% CI: 63.7-74.4%).Caregivers rated their © A Pacey, T Nancarrow, GM Egeland, 2010.A licence to publish this material has been given to ARHEN http://www.rrh.org.auchild's oral and dental health as: 'very good' (9.5%), 'good' (44.5%), 'fair' (29.5%) and 'poor' (16.6%).Very few children were taking a fluoride supplement (4.6%, 95% CI: 2.3-6.9%) or a vitamin D supplement (4.9%, 95% CI: 2.4-7.4%).Sixteen percent of children (95% CI: 12.3.-20.1) were taking a multivitamin and multimineral supplement containing vitamin D and calcium but not fluoride.In univariate analyses using data from the qualitative FFQ, children with RCE drank milk less often than children without RCE (1.6 ± 0.1 vs 2.2 ± 0.2 times per day, respectively, t-test p ≤0.01).Also, children with RCE drank more soda pop compared with children without RCE (0.8 ± 0.1 vs 0.5 ± 0.1 times per day, respectively, t-test p ≤0.05).Consistent with findings from the FFQ, children with RCE drank less milk in the previous day than children without RCE (225.9 ± 17.0 vs 325.6 ± 44.8 g/day respectively, p ≤.01).Reported-caries experience was also more common among children who did not take any nutritional supplements containing vitamin D, calcium or fluoride than among those who did (75.5% vs 60.0% respectively, χ 2 p ≤0.01).Multivariable logistic regression revealed that a higher frequency of milk intake was independently protective against having RCE (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.73-0.97).A higher frequency of high-sugar food intake was independently associated with having RCE (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02-1.12).Conclusions: A high prevalence of RCE was found among Inuit preschool-aged children in Nunavut Territory, Canada.In this cross-sectional health survey, milk intake showed protective associations while sugar intake showed deleterious associations with RCE, which is compatible with emerging literature on milk in animal-and population-based research, and with existing literature on the deleterious effects of acidic sugary drinks on dental health.This study emphasizes the likely importance of nutritional health education and better access to nutritious foods for promoting oral health.It also demonstrates the continued importance of oral health initiatives that are currently in place in Nunavut.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations28
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural and Remote HealthSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207