Parental anxiety associated with children undergoing dental treatment.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Over the past two decades, improvements in both the safety of anaesthetic agents and the techniques of operative dentistry have resulted in the popularity of "day-case anaesthesia". The aim of this study was to evaluate the stress felt by parents of children undergoing dental treatment. The study also aimed to compare the stress felt by parents of children undergoing chairside treatment to the stress felt by parents of children who received their treatment under general anaesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study Design: Stress among parents was assessed subjectively using the Modified Dental Anxiety Stress (MDAS) questionnaire and objectively using a pulse oximeter to record the heart rate. The sample comprised of 60 parents of children aged between 4 and 7 years who were divided into three groups. Group A comprised of 20 sets of parents of children who underwent complete dental treatment without any pharmacological behaviour management. Group B comprised of 20 sets of parents of children who were treated at the dental chair with N2O used as pharmacological behaviour management. Group C comprised of 20 sets of parents of children who underwent dental rehabilitation under general anaesthesia. Objective signs were recorded preoperatively, during the procedure and post-operatively. RESULTS: Dental treatment is a stressful experience for a parent. The introduction of a pharmacological method of behaviour management seems to significantly increase the stress felt by the parent. CONCLUSIONS: A significant increase in heart rate was observed among parents whose children were under treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 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".