MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2483482

Determinants of early childhood caries (ECC) in a rural Manitoba community: a pilot study.

2005· article· en· W2483482 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert J. Schroth, Michael Moffatt

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEarly childhood cariesEpidemiologyDemographyOral healthPediatricsEarly childhoodDentistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Preschool oral health is often overlooked as an important aspect of childhood health and well-being. The purposes of this study were to: (1) determine the dental status of 3-year-old children in the community of Carman, Manitoba, Canada; and (2) identify the principal determinants of Early Childhood Caries (ECC) in 2 consecutive years. METHODS: All children and mothers attending a preschool health screening fair were invited to participate. Study procedures included a retrospective interview with parents and dental examination of the child. Statistical analyses included ANOVA, chi-square, and multiple regression. A P value of <.05 denoted significance. RESULTS: A total of 61 children participated (mean age=45.7+/-3.4 months). The prevalence of ECC was 44%, while the mean deft was 2+/-3.3. Increased caries activity and ECC were associated with lower maternal level of education (P<.01). Family size was associated with deft scores (P=.03) while the presence of debris was also associated with ECC (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: ECC prevalence among these 3-year-olds is less than exhibited among other Canadian preschool children. Factors associated with ECC included debris on the primary teeth and low maternal education. Factors most associated with increased caries activity included low maternal education and increased family size. In addition, parents were able to reliably assess their child's dental health status. Larger epidemiological studies of ECC are needed to better assess prevalence and risk factors. Such data may, therefore, assist in identifying those children at greatest risk for ECC. It may also help in the redirection of scarce resources to effective preventive oral health interventions, as these children have an increased caries burden along the continuum of childhood.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations55
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicDental Health and Care UtilizationFrench-language works237,207