MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393092865 · doi:10.1111/cdoe.12953

Behaviour support in dentistry: A Delphi study to agree terminology in behaviour management

2024· article· en· W4393092865 on OpenAlexaff
Caoimhin Mac Giolla Phadraig, Olive Healy, Aisyah Ahmad Fisal, Carilynne Yarascavitch, Maria Van Harten, June Nunn, Tim Newton, Peter Sturmey, Koula Asimakopoulou, Blánaid Daly, Marie Thérèse Hosey, Pedro Vitali Kammer, Alison Dougall, Andrew Geddis‐Regan, Archana Pradhan, Arlétte Suzy Setiawan, Bryan Kerr, Clive Friedman, Bryant W. Cornelius, Christopher Stirling, Siti Zaleha Hamzah, Derek Decloux, Gustavo Fabián Molina, Gunilla Klingberg, Hani Ayup, Heather Buchanan, Helena Anjou, Isabel Maura, Ilidia Reyes Bernal Fernandez, Jacobo Limeres Posse, Jennifer Hare, Jessica Francis, Johanna Norderyd, Maryani Mohamed Rohani, Neeta Prabhu, Paul Ashley, Paula Marques, Shalini Chopra, Sharat Chandra Pani, Susanne Krämer

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Dentistry And Oral Epidemiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Anxiety and Anesthesia Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMount Sinai HospitalWestern UniversityBC Children's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersTrinity College DublinIrish Research eLibrary
KeywordsTerminologyDelphi methodMedicineContext (archaeology)Protocol (science)Set (abstract data type)DelphiOptimal distinctiveness theoryAlternative medicinePsychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Dental behaviour support (DBS) describes all specific techniques practiced to support patients in their experience of professional oral healthcare. DBS is roughly synonymous with behaviour management, which is an outdated concept. There is no agreed terminology to specify the techniques used to support patients who receive dental care. This lack of specificity may lead to imprecision in describing, understanding, teaching, evaluating and implementing behaviour support techniques in dentistry. Therefore, this e-Delphi study aimed to develop a list of agreed labels and descriptions of DBS techniques used in dentistry and sort them according to underlying principles of behaviour. METHODS: Following a registered protocol, a modified e-Delphi study was applied over two rounds with a final consensus meeting. The threshold of consensus was set a priori at 75%. Agreed techniques were then categorized by four coders, according to behavioural learning theory, to sort techniques according to their mechanism of action. RESULTS: The panel (n = 35) agreed on 42 DBS techniques from a total of 63 candidate labels and descriptions. Complete agreement was achieved regarding all labels and descriptions, while agreement was not achieved regarding distinctiveness for 17 techniques. In exploring underlying principles of learning, it became clear that multiple and differing principles may apply depending on the specific context and procedure in which the technique may be applied. DISCUSSION: Experts agreed on what each DBS technique is, what label to use, and their description, but were less likely to agree on what distinguishes one technique from another. All techniques were describable but not comprehensively categorizable according to principles of learning. While objective consistency was not attained, greater clarity and consistency now exists. The resulting list of agreed terminology marks a significant foundation for future efforts towards understanding DBS techniques in research, education and clinical care.

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)0.115
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.108
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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1150.108
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunity Dentistry And Oral EpidemiologySame topicDental Anxiety and Anesthesia TechniquesFrench-language works237,207