Investigating Socioeconomic Position in Dental Caries and Traumatic Dental Injury among Children in Quebec.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Socioeconomic position (SEP) is inversely associated with most oral health outcomes, but the patterns of association may vary depending on the specific outcome. We estimated associations between SEP and two oral health outcomes, dental caries and traumatic dental injuries (TDI), in Quebec children. METHODS: We used data from the baseline visit of the QUALITY (QUebec Adipose and Lifestyle Investigation in Youth) Cohort, an ongoing study in Montreal and Quebec, Canada. The analytical sample included 590 children aged 8-10 years. Data on parents' SEP (household income, education) and children's health behaviours and involvement in sports were obtained through questionnaires and interviews. Oral health outcomes (dental caries and TDI in permanent teeth) were assessed by clinical oral exam. Negative binomial regression was used to model dental caries (DMFS index) and number of teeth with TDI adjusting for selected covariates. RESULTS: The mean (SD) DMFS and number of TDI were 0.61 (1.43) and 0.12 (0.43), respectively. Compared to the upper quartile of income, children in the lower quartile had a DMFS approximately 3 times higher (PRR=2.68, 95% CI: 1.43, 5.04). Adjusting for oral health and nutritional behaviours had no effect. Conversely, children in the highest income quartile had a 3 times higher number of teeth with TDI compared to the lowest quartile (PRR=3.14, 95% CI: 1.22, 8.08). Physical activity did not explain this relationship. Parents' education was not associated with dental caries or TDI. CONCLUSION: SEP seems to play a different role in the cause of dental caries and TDI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".