Longitudinal comparison of factors influencing choice of dental treatment by private general practitioners

The document attached has been archived with permission from the Australian Dental Association. An external link to the publisher’s copy is included.Background: Service rate variations and appropriateness of care issues have focused attention on factors that influence treatment decisions. The aims of this study were to examine what factors dentists consider in choosing alternative treatments, the stability of these factors over time and whether stability of treatment choice was related to age of dentist. Methods: Baseline data were collected by mailed self-complete questionnaires from a random sample of Australian dentists (response rate=60.3 per cent, n=345 private general practitioners provided service data from a typical day) in 1997–1998 and followup data were collected in 2004 (response rate=76.8 per cent, n=177 matched longitudinal cases). Results: The most frequent factors considered important across six alternative treatment pair choice scenarios were caries rate for ‘exam v. x-ray’, age of patient for ‘preventive v. restorative intervention’, cost of treatment for ‘crown v. buildup’, ‘root canal v. extraction’ and ‘bridge v. denture’, and calculus for ‘prophylaxis v. scaling’. The only differences over time were (t-test, P<0.05): higher proportions of responses in the mouth status group at follow-up for ‘exam v. x-ray’; higher proportions of responses in the visit history group at follow-up for ‘preventive v. restorative intervention’; a lower proportion of responses in the caries group at follow-up for ‘crown v. build-up’; and a higher proportion of responses in the treatment constraints group at follow-up for ‘prophylaxis v. scaling’. Conclusions: While a wide range of responses were offered as factors influencing the choice of alternative treatments, cost of treatment was a major consideration in situations where significantly cheaper alternatives existed, while patient preference was commonly included as a secondary consideration across a wide range of treatment choice scenarios. The treatment choice responses showed a high degree of stability over time across all age groups of dentists, suggesting that if routines are developed these are established before or soon after graduation as a dentist.DS Brennan, AJ Spence

Practice belief scales among private general dental practitioners

The document attached has been archived with permission from the Australian Dental Association (8th Jan 2008). An external link to the publisher’s copy is included.Background: Practice beliefs have been related to service rate variation. The aims of this study were to replicate practice belief scales in Australia and investigate associations with dentist and practice characteristics and services. Method: A random sample of Australian dentists completed mailed questionnaires (response rate 60.3 per cent). Results: Private general practitioners (n=345) provided service data from a typical day. Eight practice belief items were recorded on a five-point Likert scale, yielding four factor-based scales. Approximately 85 per cent of responses were on the agreement side of the midpoint for the scales of Information giving and Patient influence, 45 per cent for Preventive orientation and approximately 10 per cent for Controlling active disease rather than developing better preventive advice. Capital city dentists had higher agreement with the Preventive orientation scale, while males and older dentists showed less disagreement with the Controlling active disease item (Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis P<0.05). Those agreeing with the scales (that is scores ≤ the median) showed (Poisson regression P<0.05): a higher rate of crown and bridge, a rate ratio (RR) of 1.31, but lower rates of extraction (RR=0.76) and prosthodontic services (RR=0.64) for the Information giving scale; a higher rate of restorative (RR=1.22) and total services per visit (RR=1.06) for the Preventive orientation scale; a higher rate of preventive services (RR=1.14), but a lower rate of crown and bridge services (0.78) for the Patient influence scale; and higher rates of crown and bridge (RR=1.40) and prosthodontic (RR=1.59) but lower rates of periodontic (RR=0.60) and extraction services (RR=0.62) for the Controlling active disease item. Conclusions: These findings confirm the factor structure of practice beliefs and demonstrate small to moderate associations with variation in service rates.DS Brennan and AJ Spence

Measuring Orthodontic Treatment Satisfaction: Questionnaire Development and Preliminary Validation

The aims of this study were to develop a reliable self-report measure of consumer satisfaction with orthodontic treatment, and to preliminarily assess its validity

Nociceptors: a phylogenetic view

The ability to react to environmental change is crucial for the survival of an organism and an essential prerequisite is the capacity to detect and respond to aversive stimuli. The importance of having an inbuilt “detect and protect” system is illustrated by the fact that most animals have dedicated sensory afferents which respond to noxious stimuli called nociceptors. Should injury occur there is often sensitization, whereby increased nociceptor sensitivity and/or plasticity of nociceptor-related neural circuits acts as a protection mechanism for the afflicted body part. Studying nociception and nociceptors in different model organisms has demonstrated that there are similarities from invertebrates right through to humans. The development of technology to genetically manipulate organisms, especially mice, has led to an understanding of some of the key molecular players in nociceptor function. This review will focus on what is known about nociceptors throughout the Animalia kingdom and what similarities exist across phyla; especially at the molecular level of ion channels

A Deep Neural Network for Simultaneous Estimation of b Jet Energy and Resolution

We describe a method to obtain point and dispersion estimates for the energies of jets arising from b quarks produced in proton-proton collisions at an energy of s = 13 TeV at the CERN LHC. The algorithm is trained on a large sample of simulated b jets and validated on data recorded by the CMS detector in 2017 corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 41 fb - 1 . A multivariate regression algorithm based on a deep feed-forward neural network employs jet composition and shape information, and the properties of reconstructed secondary vertices associated with the jet. The results of the algorithm are used to improve the sensitivity of analyses that make use of b jets in the final state, such as the observation of Higgs boson decay to b b ¯

A portrait of the Higgs boson by the CMS experiment ten years after the discovery

A Correction to this paper has been published (18 October 2023) : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06164-8.Data availability: Tabulated results are provided in the HEPData record for this analysis. Release and preservation of data used by the CMS Collaboration as the basis for publications is guided by the CMS data preservation, re-use and open acess policy.Code availability: The CMS core software is publicly available on GitHub (https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw).In July 2012, the ATLAS and CMS collaborations at the CERN Large Hadron Collider announced the observation of a Higgs boson at a mass of around 125 gigaelectronvolts. Ten years later, and with the data corresponding to the production of a 30-times larger number of Higgs bosons, we have learnt much more about the properties of the Higgs boson. The CMS experiment has observed the Higgs boson in numerous fermionic and bosonic decay channels, established its spin–parity quantum numbers, determined its mass and measured its production cross-sections in various modes. Here the CMS Collaboration reports the most up-to-date combination of results on the properties of the Higgs boson, including the most stringent limit on the cross-section for the production of a pair of Higgs bosons, on the basis of data from proton–proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 teraelectronvolts. Within the uncertainties, all these observations are compatible with the predictions of the standard model of elementary particle physics. Much evidence points to the fact that the standard model is a low-energy approximation of a more comprehensive theory. Several of the standard model issues originate in the sector of Higgs boson physics. An order of magnitude larger number of Higgs bosons, expected to be examined over the next 15 years, will help deepen our understanding of this crucial sector.BMBWF and FWF (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, FAPERGS, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES and BNSF (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); MINCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES and CSF (Croatia); RIF (Cyprus); SENESCYT (Ecuador); MoER, ERC PUT and ERDF (Estonia); Academy of Finland, MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRI (Greece); NKFIH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); MSIP and NRF (Republic of Korea); MES (Latvia); LAS (Lithuania); MOE and UM (Malaysia); BUAP, CINVESTAV, CONACYT, LNS, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MOS (Montenegro); MBIE (New Zealand); PAEC (Pakistan); MES and NSC (Poland); FCT (Portugal); MESTD (Serbia); MCIN/AEI and PCTI (Spain); MOSTR (Sri Lanka); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); MST (Taipei); MHESI and NSTDA (Thailand); TUBITAK and TENMAK (Turkey); NASU (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA). Individuals have received support from the Marie-Curie programme and the European Research Council and Horizon 2020 Grant, contract Nos. 675440, 724704, 752730, 758316, 765710, 824093, 884104, and COST Action CA16108 (European Union); the Leventis Foundation; the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office; the Fonds pour la Formation à la Recherche dans l’Industrie et dans l’Agriculture (FRIA-Belgium); the Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie (IWT-Belgium); the F.R.S.-FNRS and FWO (Belgium) under the “Excellence of Science – EOS” – be.h project n. 30820817; the Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission, No. Z191100007219010; the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic; the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (Greece); the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), under Germany’s Excellence Strategy – EXC 2121 “Quantum Universe” – 390833306, and under project number 400140256 - GRK2497; the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the New National Excellence Program - ÚNKP, the NKFIH research grants K 124845, K 124850, K 128713, K 128786, K 129058, K 131991, K 133046, K 138136, K 143460, K 143477, 2020-2.2.1-ED-2021-00181, and TKP2021-NKTA-64 (Hungary); the Council of Science and Industrial Research, India; the Latvian Council of Science; the Ministry of Education and Science, project no. 2022/WK/14, and the National Science Center, contracts Opus 2021/41/B/ST2/01369 and 2021/43/B/ST2/01552 (Poland); the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, grant CEECIND/01334/2018 (Portugal); the National Priorities Research Program by Qatar National Research Fund; MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, ERDF “a way of making Europe”, and the Programa Estatal de Fomento de la Investigación Científica y Técnica de Excelencia María de Maeztu, grant MDM-2017-0765 and Programa Severo Ochoa del Principado de Asturias (Spain); the Chulalongkorn Academic into Its 2nd Century Project Advancement Project, and the National Science, Research and Innovation Fund via the Program Management Unit for Human Resources & Institutional Development, Research and Innovation, grant B05F650021 (Thailand); the Kavli Foundation; the Nvidia Corporation; the SuperMicro Corporation; the Welch Foundation, contract C-1845; and the Weston Havens Foundation (USA)