The knowledge and attitude of Hong Kong secondary school teachers and students towards HIV infection and dentistry.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) are firmly entrenched in Hong Kong no data are available on the knowledge and attitudes of Hong Kong secondary school teachers and teenage children towards this infection, and their perception of infection control measures currently undertaken by the dental profession to prevent such infectious diseases. Hence a postal questionnaire survey of a total of 2,886 teenagers and 372 school teachers of 21 secondary schools in Hong Kong was conducted. The questionnaire comprised a total of 13 questions divided into two categories; the first, aimed at assessing the respondents' general knowledge and attitudes towards AIDS, and the second related to AIDS, dentistry and infection control. More than half of the students and one quarter of the teachers surmised that HIV infection is equivalent to developing AIDS. Although the great majority of the respondents (85-97 per cent) were aware that HIV can not be transmitted through sharing combs and meals, one in two teachers and one in three students thought that the virus could be transmitted through saliva. A large majority of respondents believed television to be the most, and dentists the least, informative source on AIDS out of a list of eight options. Approximately one half of both groups were concerned about contracting HIV infection during dental treatment and 65 per cent of students and 57 per cent of teachers thought that dentists did not have sufficient knowledge to identify AIDS patients. Finally, more than three quarters of the respondents thought that it would be ill-advised to visit a dentist treating HIV-infected patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".