Socio-Environmental Typologies and Incidence of Dental Caries from Childhood to Adolescence among Youth in Montreal: The QUALITY Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Leveraging data from a cohort study of Quebec youth with a family history of obesity, this study aimed to (i) identify neighbourhood socio-environmental typologies in childhood and (ii) estimate their associations with the incidence of dental caries in adolescence. METHODS: We used baseline (2005-2008) and second follow-up (2012-2015) data from the ongoing QUALITY cohort study in Montreal, Canada, which included 512 children aged 8-10 years with ≥1 biological parent with obesity at baseline. Based on prior literature and data availability, we selected three key neighbourhood-level indicators - social disorder, social deprivation, and material deprivation - measured in both school and residential settings. Latent class analysis was used to derive the socio-environmental typologies by combining social disorder, social deprivation, and material deprivation of the social environment in school and residential neighbourhoods. The outcome was dental caries incidence, assessed as the change in the Decayed, Missing, Filled Surface index. Negative binomial regression was performed to estimate incidence ratios (IRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Only three neighbourhood socio-environmental typologies were identified. Type 1 neighbourhoods: high social disorder, high social deprivation, and low material deprivation; type 2 neighbourhoods: median social disorder, median social deprivation, and median material deprivation; type 3 neighbourhoods: low social disorder, low social deprivation, and high material deprivation. Compared to type 1, the IRs (95% CIs) were 0.9 (0.6-1.2) for type 2 and 0.8 (0.6-1.1) for type 3. CONCLUSION: Neighbourhoods with lower social disorder and social deprivation may offer a protective effect against dental caries in youth. .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".