School children’s oral health status, behaviours, and dental care utilization: the case of a northern Thailand elementary school
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Although preventable, dental caries remain a serious global public health threat. There are a number of risk factors for the development of dental caries in the general population, and in elementary school children in Thailand in particular, especially if they are from suburban areas. Objective To identify the prevalence of dental caries in the form of decayed-missing-filled teeth for the permanent (DMFT) and primary (dmft) dentition, and their risk factors among children between 6 and 12 years of age attending a public school in Chiang Rai in northern Thailand. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 6–12-year-old children attending public education at Thesaban 1 School, Chiang Saen District, Chiang Rai Province in Thailand. All school children from grades 1 to 6 were examined by trained dental students from Mae Fah Luang University’s School of Dentistry in December 2023. Children were clinically examined for DMFT/dmft while demographic information about the children was collected from school records. Children also responded to a standardized 17-item survey about their oral health care behaviours. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used. All tests were set at 95% CI and p> 0.05. Results A total of 232 children (100% of eligible participants) were examined and 96 (40%) responded to the survey. Most children were Buddhists (n=186, 80.1%), and had at least one permanent tooth with sealant (n=198, 85.3%); 82.5% of the 232 children exhibited dental caries/extraction/fillings in primary teeth. The average dmft was 4.1 (1.8–8.8) and the average DMFT was 1.6 (0.1–3.3). Fifty children (21.5%) had their grandparents as their main caregiver. Children who brushed their teeth without fluoridated toothpaste were 1.99 times more likely to have at least 1 permanent tooth with dental decay than children who used fluoridated toothpaste ( p= 0.065). Conclusion In this study, a high percentage of dental caries was observed among children from suburban areas in the northernmost province of Thailand. Public health intervention and oral health promotion remain an immediate need among these children.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".