Child physical abuse: Perception and responsibility of dentists living in the United Arab Emirates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims: The aims of this study were to investigate dentists’ level of knowledge and experience regarding child physical abuse in the United Arab Emirates, to identify barriers that prevent the reporting of suspected cases by dental practitioners, and to assess the need for training dentists in child protection. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 124 dentists working in private practice in the Emirate of Dubai; the data were collected by self-administered structured questionnaires. Data were analyzed using descriptive analyses for responses to each question. Results: Of all general dental practitioners invited to participate, only 70% have responded. Almost one-quarter of the dentists encountered a suspicious child abuse case at least once in their career, but only 30% of those reported their suspicion. The most common barriers that preclude the dentists from reporting child abuse cases were uncertainty about their diagnosis, lack of knowledge regarding referral procedures, followed by the fear of violence in the family toward the child. However, the majority of the participants were aware of their legal responsibilities toward protecting children from abuse and they expressed their need for further training in this area. Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, it appears that the level of knowledge among the respondents regarding the recognition and reporting of child physical abuse was lacking. Therefore, specialized training in this area is highly recommended.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".