MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132897846

Traumatic dental injury in 12--14-year-old Ontario schoolchildren: Etiology and environment, its impact on quality of life, frequency and use of mouthguards

2006· dissertation· W7132897846 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kausar Sadia Fakhruddin

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2006
Typedissertation
Language
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Trauma and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMouthguardDental traumaOccupational safety and healthEtiologyInjury preventionPoison controlSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. To investigate the etiology, place of injury, and social impact of traumatic dental injuries, and the frequency of mouthguard use among 12 and 14-year-old Ontario schoolchildren. Methods. Age- and gender-matched, case-comparison study of 270 children from two Ontario communities. Data sources: Clinical data collected by trained dental hygienists (Dental Trauma Index, DMFT and AC-IOTN) and mailed questionnaire. Results. Falls at home and school were the most common cause of injury. Untreated trauma cases experienced more social and functional impacts than comparisons. Only 5% of children wore mouthguards. Over 50% reported that they "have never been told to wear a mouthguard."Conclusion. Despite the low prevalence of dental injuries, these injuries still had a significant social impact on adolescents. While injuries could be prevented with the use of mouthguards, coaches, teachers, and health professionals were not providing children or parents with adequate information about the benefits of their use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.354 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicDental Trauma and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207