MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403630218 · doi:10.54589/aol.37/2/134

Camouflaged prejudice and the affirmation of skin colour differences: assessment of racism among Brazilian undergraduate dental students

2024· article· en· W4403630218 on OpenAlexaff
Renata Matos Lamenha Lins, Saul Martins Paiva, Flávio de Freitas Mattos, João Luiz Bastos, Júnia Maria Serra‐Negra

Bibliographic record

VenueActa odontológica latinoamericana/Acta odontológica latinoamericana · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsRacismPrejudice (legal term)DenialPsychologySocial psychologyWhite (mutation)Clinical psychologySociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The negative oral health outcomes of disadvantaged racial groups have been well-documented, as racial disparity in oral health persists over time and in different locations1. However, it is important to note that skin colour has no biological meaning, and the observed differences can be physiological expressions of social injustice such as racism. Aim: The aim of this study was to analyse the association between levels of modern racism (camouflaged prejudice and affirmation of differences) and sociodemographic characteristics of Brazilian dental students. Material and Method: An epidemiological cross-sectional online survey was conducted on 441 Brazilian undergraduate dental students using Google Forms. Participants were recruited via emails and social media, using the snowball technique. The Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) was followed. The survey used sociodemographic variables, and the Brazilian version of the Modern Racism Scale (B-MRS), which measures the cognitive component of subtle racial attitudes. The scale assesses the central notion of disguised prejudice and has two domains: 'denial of prejudice' and 'affirmation of differences'. Participants' self-declared skin colour was categorized as "white" and "non-white" (black, brown, indigenous, yellow). Univariate analysis and Poisson regression with robust variance were applied. Results: Participants' mean age was 24.1 years (±5.4). Most participants were self-declared as white (54%) and 46% as non-white skin colour. Higher B-MRS overall-scores were observed in male (p=0.008) and non-white (p=0.002) students. B-MRS scores for the domain 'affirmation of differences' (representation of those who believe that whites and non-whites are truly different) were higher among male dental students (PR=1.138; CI 95%: 1.019-1.271) and those from low-income families (PR=1.306; CI 95%: 1.089-1.565). Scores for the domain 'denial of prejudice' (the idea that non-whites use their race to receive legal benefits) were higher among male dental students (PR=1.328; CI 95%: 1.129-1.562). Conclusions: In general, male non-white students had higher modern racism indicators. Male students from low-income families believed that whites and non-whites are truly different, accounting for the affirmation of difference in this sample.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.345
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

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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa odontológica latinoamericana/Acta odontológica latinoamericanaSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207