The Prevalence and Risks of Early Childhood Caries (ECC) in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the prevalence and risks of early childhood caries (ECC) among children less than 71 months of age in Toronto, Canada, and to evaluate the association between parental/caregiver depression and ECC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A secondary analysis of data previously collected by the Toronto Public Health as part of the 2003 Toronto Perinatal and Child Health Survey was performed. The 90-item survey was conducted over the telephone to 1,000 families with children from zero years (birth) to six years of age. Parents/caregivers were asked about factors related to the development and health of their children. For this study, only children younger than six years of age (less than 71 months) were included (n=833). The primary outcome of interest was self-reported and measured by the response to the question of whether a physician/dentist had ever told the parent/caregiver his/her child had ECC. RESULTS: The prevalence of ECC was 4.7 percent (37 of 791 children). The child's age, his/her history of dental visits, teeth brushing, the use of fluoridated toothpaste, the parent's/caregiver's depressive tendencies, the language spoken at home, and the household annual income were all significant in the bivariate analysis. Multiple logistic regression identified four factors associated with ECC: the child's age (being three years of age or older), having at least one parent/caregiver with depression, not speaking English at home, and having an annual household income less than $40,000 in Canadian dollars (CAD). CONCLUSION: While a child's age, home language, and household income are known risks for ECC, the finding that parental/caregiver depression may be related to ECC is new. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Multiple risk factors are involved in the development of early childhood caries. Of particular importance are demographic (e.g., child's age), social (e.g., annual household income), and psychosocial factors (e.g., parental/caregiver depression) that are indirectly linked to ECC. More attention needs to be placed on understanding the role and process by which these factors influence the development of ECC.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".