MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910192547 · doi:10.3886/e116861

SOC-TPB Model to predict oral health behaviours among preschoolers

2019· dataset· en· W6910192547 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueICPSR Data Holdings · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of planned behaviorAttendancePsychological interventionStructural equation modelingDemographicsOral healthFocus groupIntervention (counseling)Dental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Dental caries is the most common chronic childhood disease that occurs in a continuum and can be prevented by children and their parents’ adherence to recommended oral health behaviors. Theory-driven tools help practitioners to identify the causes for poor adherence and develop effective interventions. This study examined the Expanded Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) Model by adding the concept of Sense of Coherence (SOC) to predict parental adherence to preschooler’s preventive dental visits. Methods: Data regarding socio-economic demographics were collected from parents of children aged 2-6 years. Constructs of TPB including parental attitudes, subjective norms (SN), Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC), and intention to attend preventive dental visits for their preschoolers were collected by questionnaire, alongside parents' sense of coherence (SOC). Dental attendance was measured by asking if the child had a regular dental visit during the last year. Structural Equation Modeling Analysis (SEMA) was carried out to identify significant direct and indirect (mediated) pathways in the extended TPB model. Conclusions: The expanded TPB model explained a great deal of variance in preschooler’s dental attendance. These findings suggest that the expanded model could be used as the framework for designing interventions or strategies to enhance dental attendance among preschoolers; in particular, such strategies should focus specifically on enhancing parental SOC including empowerment. <br><br><br><br><br>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0120.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.013

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.235 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICPSR Data HoldingsFrench-language works237,207