MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312190602 · doi:10.1186/s12913-022-08925-z

Canadian dental hygienists’ experiences and perceptions of regulatory guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative descriptive analysis

2022· article· en· W4312190602 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lindsay MacDonald, Michael Glogauer, Paul Allison, Carlos Quiñonez, Sreenath Madathil, Leigha D. Rock

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Research and COVID-19
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of TorontoDalhousie University
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsThematic analysisPandemicMedicineQualitative researchDescriptive statisticsFamily medicineNursingHygieneCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In Spring of 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Canadian provincial dental hygiene regulatory bodies implemented new practice guidelines. Reports of stress, anxiety and conflict experienced by dental hygienists have been linked to miscommunication between oral health regulators at this time. Limited data exists on the perceptions and experiences of dental hygienists navigating new guidelines for dental hygiene care during the pandemic. Therefore, the objective of our study was to explore via descriptive thematic analysis how dental hygienists experienced and perceived: i) dental hygiene practice during the COVID-19 pandemic, and ii) their regulatory body's COVID-19 guidelines. METHODS: Participants were identified through provincial dental hygiene licensing bodies. Online bi-monthly questionnaires were administered to participants (n = 876) from December 2021 to January 2022. Two open-ended questions were asked in the questionnaire. A qualitative descriptive thematic analysis was applied to these two questions. RESULTS: Major themes at baseline relayed challenges related to workplace compliance, patient treatment and communication of practice protocols. Across responses, hygienists confirmed conflicting messaging from regulators and guideline interpretations as stressors impacting their professional practice and satisfaction within the profession. Participant responses at endpoint cited increased satisfaction with regulatory guidelines as the pandemic evolved, yet inconsistencies in regulators' messaging was noted as a prevailing issue. CONCLUSION: Inconsistent guideline messaging reflects an increased need for collaboration amongst oral health care regulators to streamline protocols for practice and reduce interprofessional conflict in pandemic circumstances. A national unified approach is warranted in establishing guidelines for dental hygiene practice in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0160.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicDental Research and COVID-19French-language works237,207