MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7065174841

Dental students’ awareness, preparedness and barriers towards managing tobacco-using patients

2017· other· en· W7065174841 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessNicotine replacement therapyIntervention (counseling)Smoking cessationQuarter (Canadian coin)Tobacco use
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To evaluate dental students’ perceived awareness, preparedness and barriers towards managing tobacco-using patients in Hong Kong.
\nMethods: A validated fifty-two-item closed-ended questionnaire was administered to dental students who were in their clinical years in 2017 during classes. The questionnaire consisted of five sections: demographic data, views and confidence towards practicing tobacco-cessation counseling (TCC), clinical practices when managing tobacco-using patients, attitudes toward dental professional’s role in tobacco cessation and perceived barriers during counseling.
\nResults: All 206 invited students had participated in this study. Most (93%) agreed that dentists should deliver tobacco cessation counseling and 99% of the students agreed that intervention should be done before dental implant placement. 85% of students felt confident in explaining the negative impacts of tobacco use on oral health. However, only around a quarter (27%) of students were well-prepared to help patients in tobacco cessation. The majority (96%) agreed that they would advise patients to quit tobacco, and most (85%) had attempted assisting patients to quit smoking, but only less than a half (43%) had succeeded in reducing cigarettes consumption of their patients. While 60% of students agreed Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) was helpful for patients to quit tobacco use, only 28% understood its mechanism of action and merely 16% were knowledgeable enough to introduce NRT to their patients. 81% students felt their patients lacked the motivation to quit smoking, and 62% of students felt they did not have sufficient skills at this stage of their training.
\nConclusions: Most students had positive attitudes towards dental professional’s role to promote tobacco cessation. However, only a minority of students were well-prepared to manage tobacco-using patients. The main barriers were found to be patients’ apathy, students’ incompetency and inadequate familiarity with NRT. Greater emphasis should be given in teaching of TCC techniques to improve the confidence of dental students when managing tobacco-using patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong)Same topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207