MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295297786 · doi:10.1111/cdoe.12224

Psychosocial correlates of oral hygiene behaviour in people aged 9 to 19 – a systematic review with meta‐analysis

2016· review· en· W2295297786 on OpenAlex
Janneke F. M. Scheerman, C. van Loveren, Berno van Meijel, Elise Dusseldorp, Eva Wartewig, G.H.W. Verrips, Johannes C. F. Ket, Pepijn van Empelen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Dentistry And Oral Epidemiology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicineCINAHLOral hygienePsycINFOClinical psychologyTooth brushingMeta-analysisCoping (psychology)Locus of controlSocial supportMEDLINEPsychiatryDentistryPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This systematic and meta-analytic review aimed to quantify the association of psychosocial correlates with oral hygiene behaviour among 9- to 19-year olds. METHODS: A systematic search up to August 2015 was carried out using the following databases: PubMed, PsycInfo, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science. If necessary, authors of studies were contacted to obtain unpublished statistical information. A study was eligible for inclusion when it evaluated the association between the psychosocial correlates and oral hygiene behaviour varying from self-reports to clinical measurements, including plaque and bleeding scores. A modified New Castle Ottawa Scale was applied to examine the quality of the included studies. RESULTS: Twenty-seven data sets (k) presented in 22 publications, addressing nine psychosocial correlates, were found to be eligible for the meta-analysis. For both tooth brushing and oral hygiene behaviour, random effect models revealed significant weighted average correlation (r+ ) for the psychosocial factors: 'intention', 'self-efficacy', 'attitude' (not significant for tooth brushing), 'social influence', 'coping planning' and 'action planning' (r+ ranging from 0.18 to 0.57). Little or no associations were found for 'locus of control', 'self-esteem' and 'sense of coherence' (r+ ranges from 0.01 to 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: The data at present indicates that 'self-efficacy', 'intention', 'social influences', 'coping planning' and 'action planning' are potential psychosocial determinants of oral health behaviour. Future studies should consider a range of psychological factors that have not been studied, but have shown to be important psychosocial determinants of health behaviours, such as 'self-determination', 'anticipated regret', 'action control' and 'self-identity'. Effectiveness of addressing these potential determinants to induce behaviour change should be further examined by intervention trials.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.314 · 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