MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181529606 · doi:10.1016/j.identj.2021.04.006

Managing Cardiac Patients: Dentists’ Knowledge, Perceptions, and Practices

2021· article· en· W3181529606 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Dental Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfective Endocarditis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health Outcomes
FundersPrincess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University
KeywordsMedicineIntervention (counseling)Family medicineCertificationEmergency medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Dental patients may require invasive treatment, and awareness of their medical conditions is essential for optimal care. We assessed the knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes of dentists practicing in Saudi Arabia (SA) and their associations with managing patients with common cardiac conditions. METHODS: A national survey of knowledge and attitudes of practicing dentists towards patients with common cardiac conditions was conducted from May 2019 to July 2020 in SA. The survey comprised a newly developed, validated, electronic, self-administered English questionnaire. RESULTS: Overall, 282 dentists completed the survey, of whom 45.5% perceived cardiac patients as difficult to manage, while 64.5% stated that they refer these patients to cardiologists before dental intervention. Regarding knowledge about cardiac conditions, 72% achieved an overall knowledge score <55%; however, their infective endocarditis scores were better. Consultants and specialists (P < .001), those with a PhD/board certification (P = .013), dentists with prior education on cardiac patient management (P = .002), and those working with a cardiologist (P = .016) scored higher on knowledge. Conversely, private dentists (P = .003) and those referring patients to cardiologists before treatment (P = .003) scored lower. Dentists' knowledge of cardiovascular diseases in women was low; only those who believed women experience a greater risk of cardiac complications achieved a higher score. Approximately 90.1% wished to receive education regarding cardiac patient management. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of cardiac patient management was suboptimal in this study. Dentists perceived cardiac patients as difficult to manage, but wished to learn more regarding optimal management. Thus, postgraduate education programmes that promote optimal dental management strategies for cardiac patients are necessary.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it