| Title |
Four-level evaluation of health promotion intervention for preventing early childhood caries: a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-017-4783-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leila Basir, Bita Rasteh, Ali Montazeri, Marzieh Araban |
| Abstract |
Early childhood caries (ECC) is the most common dental disease among children, which can affect children's primary teeth during their teething. This study evaluates an intervention for preventing early childhood caries in a pediatric population in Ahvaz, Iran. The population of this study (IRCT2017070210804N10) consists of 104 women with 12 to 36 months of age without dental caries referred to a health care center in Ahvaz, Iran. The children were randomly assigned to either an experimental or control group in equal numbers. First, the demographic information of participants was collected through a questionnaire containing components of perceived threat, health literacy, and oral health behaviors using a valid and reliable questionnaire. The ECC status of the children was established by a dentist. Control group received "standard well baby care". The experimental group received standard well baby care in addition to educational interventions, including lecture and group discussion. After 6 months, the participant completed the questionnaire for the second time, and the children's teeth were reexamined. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 15 at a significance level of p < 0.05. The mean ages of women and children were 31 ± 6.68 years and 18 ± 7.21 months, respectively. Before the intervention, no significant difference was documented between the groups for the study variables, p > 0.05. However, after the intervention, a significant difference was observed between the perceived threats (41.15 ± 4.46 in the experimental group and 38.26 ± 4.21 in the control group, p = 0.001), health literacy (20.98 ± 2.15 in the experimental group and 19.76 ± 2.70 in the control group, p = 0.01), oral health behaviors (7.75 ± 2.30 in the experimental group and 6.15 ± 2.65 in the control group, p = 0.01), and the incidence of ECC (13% in the experimental group and 35% in the control group, p = 0.001). This intervention had positive effects on the perceived threat, health literacy, and health behaviors; and the intervention could reduce the incidence of ECC. The finding of this study provided a suggestion for evidence-based decision-making processes regarding ECCs prevention programs. IRCT2017070210804N10 (retrospectively registered). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 20% |
| Latvia | 1 | 20% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Ireland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 192 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 6% |
| Researcher | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 28 | 15% |
| Unknown | 81 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 5% |
| Psychology | 5 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 6% |
| Unknown | 85 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 March 2018.
All research outputs
#13,335,574
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,363
of 14,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,824
of 322,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#91
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,986 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,939 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.