Knowledge, Attitudes, and Usage Related to Dietary Supplements in a Group of Canadian Dental Students: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Considering the increasing usage of dietary supplements by the general population, knowledgeable dental practitioners should be able to guide patients concerning the judicial use, efficacy, adverse effects and potential drug interactions of these products. The aim of this study was to determine usage, knowledge, and attitudes related to dietary supplements in a group of Canadian dental students. Methods: A total of 105 dental students completed a questionnaire consisting of three parts; Demographics and lifestyle; Usage and opinions concerning dietary supplements; and Knowledge concerning micronutrients and deficiency. Results: Multivitamins and protein powder were most commonly consumed as individual supplements, followed by vitamin C and calcium. Based on the Poisson Regression conducted, there were statistically significant differences in the knowledge of micronutrients between the students of first year and second year (p= 0.0030), third year (p=0.0060) as well as the fourth year (p=0.0190). However, there were no statistically significant differences in the knowledge of micronutrients between the students who consumed dietary supplements and those who did not (p=0.070). Conclusion: Although dental students at the University of Saskatchewan consume a large number of dietary supplements, knowledge regarding the effects micronutrients have on the body, appeared to be inadequate. This highlights the need to increase content concerning nutrition and dietary supplements within the dental curriculum with the goal of producing well informed oral health personnel, who will be in a better position to effectively counsel patients on diet and nutrition with regards to their oral health.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".