Peer-led oral health education model for elementary school-aged children in British Columbia, Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine the effectiveness of peer-led preventive oral health education for elementary school-aged children. Methods: A controlled, non-randomized interventional study included children in grades 4 to 6 (N = 372) from 6 schools in British Columbia, Canada. The control group (3 schools) received a class-based lecture on oral health. In the intervention group (3 schools), each sixth grader mentored a small group of fourth and fifth graders. The study outcomes were 1) need for oral care referrals (visual screening); 2) oral health knowledge (self-reports); 3) oral self-care practice (OSC-P); and 4) oral self-care skills (OSC-S). Assessments of OSC-P and OSC-S were based on disclosed dental biofilm levels. Study group comparisons were done at baseline and 8 to 12 months. Results: A high need for oral care referrals was found, with a substantial reduction achieved during the study period. Dietary knowledge improved minimally in the intervention group. In both study groups and within age groups, there was a wide variation in OSC-P and OSC-S. Overall, children's OSC-P scores were substantially higher than their OSC-S scores. Oral self-care outcomes improved over time in both groups (except for fourth graders in the control group), with a more substantial improvement in the intervention group. From baseline to study end, the mean OSC-P improved by 11.9% (intervention group) and 5.9% (control group). Improvement values for OSC-S were 12.8% and 5.2%. Conclusions: The need for oral care referrals was reduced, but improvement in oral health knowledge was minimal. Oral self-care outcomes improved more in the intervention than in the control group.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".