Dentists in providing tobacco cessation services: Factors assist and resist
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The use of tobacco and its related health effects has emerged as a serious health problem. In a largest survey conducted in the UAE, the point prevalence of active cigarette smoking among men and women was 24% and 1% respectively. Dentists have the opportunity to assist their patients to change their habit of tobacco use. Studies reported that brief interventions of motivating tobacco users to make quit attempt within the dental settings may increase the chance of tobacco abstinence. Objective To determine the factors which assist and the dentists in delivering tobacco cessation advice to their patients in Northern Emirates, UAE. Methods Cross sectional study design was used in this study. Dentists practicing in hospitals, dental clinics, poly clinics and Primary Health Care Centers in the Northern Emirates, UAE were the study population. A validated pilot tested questionnaire was used in this study. 250 dentists participated in the study; participants were recruited conveniently. Results Majority (63%) reported of poor practice towards tobacco cessation advice as compared to those with good practice (37%). Around 61.6% perceived lack of patient’s interest as the most common preventing factors. Nearly 90% responded distribution of relevant educational materials and availability of appropriate referral system as facilitating factors in providing advice. Conclusion Unavailability of appropriate referral services, lack of interests of patients, lack of printed resources and lack of training were commonly reported barriers. While distribution of relevant educational materials and provision of training opportunities were reported to be significant facilitating factors.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".