Dental Students’ Perceptions of and Attitudes About Poverty: A Canadian Participatory Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative case study was conducted in a Canadian dental school using a participatory approach and was based on Paulo Freire's theoretical concept of conscientização, a form of critical consciousness that involves awareness of social reality and fosters action towards social justice. The aim of the study was to understand dental students' perceptions of and attitudes about poverty and dental care provided to people living in poverty. It also examined how these perceptions shape students' plans for their professional careers, as well as their opinions on educational strategies to prepare them to work with poor patients. The sources of data generation were semistructured interviews, participant observations, and document analysis. A deductive-inductive thematic strategy was used to analyze the data. Out of a class of thirty-five senior dental students, the authors interviewed a convenience sample of twelve: five male and seven female. The findings suggest that the students had incipient conscientização about poverty-related themes. They perceived poverty as a distant issue and as the responsibility of the government or of the poor individuals themselves. The students did not have plans to work with patients living in poverty in the future and struggled to envision ways to address these patients' needs other than volunteer work. This research supports the need for academic dental institutions to adopt strategies to increase students' critical consciousness about oral health inequities. Reducing oral health inequities is a matter of social justice, and dental care providers are key actors in this endeavor.
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 | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.043 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".