504 EVALUATION OF AN ORAL HEALTH PROMOTION PROGRAM IN A REMOTE FIRST NATIONS COMMUNITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background</h3> Poor oral hygiene is associated with an increased risk of diabetes, coronary artery disease and premature labor; all major issues for First Nations populations. For over 3 years our university has shared a collaborative health prevention and education partnership with a remote Tsimshian community in Northern British Columbia promoting oral health amongst their children and providing unique educational opportunities for pediatric residents. <h3>Method</h3> After an extensive dialogue between the Band Council and our Residency Training Committee, a school-based program centered on brushing, flossing, and topical fluoride began. Pre-intervention assessment and training were done jointly by the departments of Dentistry and Pediatrics. Residents and a faculty supervisor stay in the community every 2 months to contribute ongoing support, age-appropriate educational modules for the children, and collaborative health care services (acute and preventive) with the Health Director and the local nursing station. Multidisciplinary evaluation is ongoing and includes oral, general health, community awareness and involvement and educational parameters. <h3>Results</h3> 80 children (100% of those of school age) were enrolled. Initially the majority of children had evidence of poor oral health, and knowledge and practices were limited. Less than 20% of the children were decay free, and the mean decay missing filled score (DMFS) for preK children was 9.9 (SD 12.1); for school aged children (k–12) the DMFS score was 5.7 (SD 6.2). One year later, 41% of the children enrolled in the study have no new cavities. Currently, all the children in the community remain enrolled in the program. The results are seen as significant by the community. 45 pediatric trainees and 18 faculty members have spent time in the community; our trainees evaluate their involvement as an educational highlight in their training; and the program has received awards from Aboriginal and University agencies. <h3>Conclusion</h3> The ‘Brighter Smiles program’ has synergistically combined the culture and knowledge of a vibrant First Nation’s community with those of a University Residency program committed to advocacy for child health and innovative resident education. Key attitudes have changed for both groups and a measurable improvement in oral health has occurred.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".