Who are the 10%? Characteristics of the populations and communities receiving fluoridated water in England.

OBJECTIVES: In England, around 10% of the population receive optimally fluoridated water. This coverage has evolved through a combination of historical local decision-making and natural geography, rather than being strategically targeted at the national level. It is important to understand if the current distribution is equitable according to indicators of oral health need and to identify any population-level differences in socio-demographic characteristics that could introduce bias to studies evaluating the effectiveness of water fluoridation. BASIC RESEARCH DESIGN: Descriptive analysis comparing the census characteristics of populations that received optimally fluoridated (=/⟩ 0.7 mg F/L) and non-fluoridated water (⟨0.7 mg F/L) between 2009 and 2020. RESULTS: Populations receiving fluoridated water between 2009-2020 were on average slightly younger, more urban, more deprived, with lower education levels, higher unemployment and lower car and home ownership than the populations who received non-fluoridated water. They are more ethnically diverse, with a higher proportion of Asian ethnicity and a lower proportion of White ethnicity, compared to the non-fluoridated population. DISCUSSION: This descriptive analysis provides evidence that water fluoridation coverage within England is targeted reasonably equitably in relation to population-level indicators of need. It also confirms the need to consider the impact of underlying differences in age, deprivation, rurality, and ethnicity when evaluating the impact of water fluoridation on health outcomes in England.

Workforce Planning Models for Oral Health Care: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: For health care services to address the health care needs of populations and respond to changes in needs over time, workforces must be planned. This requires quantitative models to estimate future workforce requirements that take account of population size, oral health needs, evidence-based approaches to addressing needs, and methods of service provision that maximize productivity. The aim of this scoping review was to assess whether and how these 4 elements contribute to existing models of oral health workforce planning. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted. MEDLINE, Embase, HMIC, and EconLit were searched, all via OVID. Additionally, gray literature databases were searched and key bodies and policy makers contacted. Workforce planning models were included if they projected workforce numbers and were specific to oral health. No limits were placed on country. A single reviewer completed initial screening of abstracts; 2 independent reviewers completed secondary screening and data extraction. A narrative synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 4,009 records were screened, resulting in 42 included articles detailing 47 models. The workforce planning models varied significantly in their use of data on oral health needs, evidence-based services, and provider productivity, with most models relying on observed levels of service utilization and demand. CONCLUSIONS: This review has identified quantitative workforce planning models that aim to estimate future workforce requirements. Approaches to planning the oral health workforce are not always based on deriving workforce requirements from population oral health needs. In many cases, requirements are not linked to population needs, while in models where needs are included, they are constrained by the existence and availability of the required data. It is critical that information systems be developed to effectively capture data necessary to plan future oral health care workforces in ways that relate directly to the needs of the populations being served. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: Policy makers can use the results of this study when making decisions about the planning of oral health care workforces and about the data to routinely collect within health services. Collection of suitable data will allow for the continual improvement of workforce planning, leading to a responsive health service and likely future cost savings.

Recruitment and Consent in an observational study.

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to explore the consent rate and associated potential bias across a cohort in a large longitudinal population based study. RESEARCH DESIGN: Data were taken from a study designed to examine the effects of the reintroduction of community water fluoridation on children's oral health over a five-year period. Children were recruited from a fluoridated and non-fluoridated area in Cumbria, referred to as Group 1 and Group 2. RESULTS: Data were available for 3138 individuals. The consent rate was 12.91 percentage points lower in Group 2 than Group 1 (95% CI -16.27 to -9.56, p⟨0.001). The population in Group 2 was more deprived (higher Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD)) than Group 1 before consent was taken. Consent was not associated with deprivation in either group. CONCLUSION: The cohort appeared to be unaffected by IMD-related non-consent. However there was a difference in consent rate between the two groups. With the population in Group 1 being more deprived than Group 2, it will be important to incorporate these differences into the analysis at the end of this longitudinal study.

Protocol for a Randomised controlled trial to Evaluate the effectiveness and cost benefit of prescribing high dose FLuoride toothpaste in preventing and treating dEntal Caries in high-risk older adulTs (reflect trial).

BACKGROUND: Dental caries in the expanding elderly, predominantly-dentate population is an emerging public health concern. Elderly individuals with heavily restored dentitions represent a clinical challenge and significant financial burden for healthcare systems, especially when their physical and cognitive abilities are in decline. Prescription of higher concentration fluoride toothpaste to prevent caries in older populations is expanding in the UK, significantly increasing costs for the National Health Services (NHS) but the effectiveness and cost benefit of this intervention are uncertain. The Reflect trial will evaluate the effectiveness and cost benefit of General Dental Practitioner (GDP) prescribing of 5000 ppm fluoride toothpaste and usual care compared to usual care alone in individuals 50 years and over with high-risk of caries. METHODS/DESIGN: A pragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled trial involving adults aged 50 years and above attending NHS dental practices identified by their dentist as having high risk of dental caries. Participants will be randomised to prescription of 5000 ppm fluoride toothpaste (frequency, amount and duration decided by GDP) and usual care only. 1200 participants will be recruited from approximately 60 dental practices in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland and followed up for 3 years. The primary outcome will be the proportion of participants receiving any dental treatment due to caries. Secondary outcomes will include coronal and root caries increments measured by independent, blinded examiners, patient reported quality of life measures, and economic outcomes; NHS and patient perspective costs, willingness to pay, net benefit (analysed over the trial follow-up period and modelled lifetime horizon). A parallel qualitative study will investigate GDPs' practises of and beliefs about prescribing the toothpaste and patients' beliefs and experiences of the toothpaste and perceived impacts on their oral health-related behaviours. DISCUSSION: The Reflect trial will provide valuable information to patients, policy makers and clinicians on the costs and benefits of an expensive, but evidence-deficient caries prevention intervention delivered to older adults in general dental practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: 2017-002402-13 registered 02/06/2017, first participant recruited 03/05/2018. Ethics Reference No: 17/NE/0329/233335. Funding Body: Health Technology Assessment funding stream of National Institute for Health Research. Funder number: HTA project 16/23/01. Trial Sponsor: Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9WL. The Trial was prospectively registered.

Prevalence of distal surface caries in the second molar among referrals for assessment of third molars: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

We conducted a systematic review of epidemiological studies to assess the prevalence of distal surface caries (DSC) in second molars adjacent to third molars. We searched the Cochrane Library, Lilacs, Embase, and Medline through Ovid® (Wolters Kluwer) to retrieve English and non-English papers from inception to June 2016, and supplemented this with a search of the references and by tracking citations. Three reviewers contributed: one reviewed all the papers, and the other two divided the rest between them. They extracted data, completed structured quality assessments with a validated risk of bias tool for observational studies, and categorised the summary scores. The search yielded 81 records and 11 studies were analysed. The considerable methodological diversity meant that five were not eligible for inclusion in the quantitative synthesis. A meta-analysis of six studies on the prevalence of DSC and a subgroup analysis of three on various third-molar angulations were indicated. The overall pooled prevalence estimate calculated with a random-effects model was 23% (95% CI 2% to 44%) among patients. Prevalence subtotals were 20% (95% CI 5% to 36%) for prospective, and 15% (95% CI 5% to 36%) for retrospective studies among teeth. A subgroup analysis of three studies with 1296 patients (1666 molars) yielded a prevalence of DSC of 36% (95% CI 5% to 67%) for mesial impactions and 22% (95% CI 1% to 42%) for horizontal impactions. DSC was present in 3% of distally-inclined impactions, (95% CI 1% to 5%) and in 7% (95% CI 1% to 13%) of vertical third molars. The studies varied. The risk of bias was low in one and moderate in two. European studies suggested that DSC may be present in about one in four referrals for the assessment of third molars, and that the risk is considerably higher in those with convergent third molar impactions.

Productive efficiency and its determinants in the Community Dental Service in the north-west of England.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficiency of service provision in the Community Dental Services and its determinants in the North-West of England. SETTING AND SAMPLE: 40 Community Dental Services sites operating across the North-West of England. BASIC RESEARCH DESIGN: A data envelopment analysis was undertaken of inputs (number of surgeries, hours worked by dental officers, therapists, hygienists and others) and outputs (treatments delivered, number of courses of treatment and patients seen) of the Community Dental Services to produce relative efficiency ratings by health authority. These were further analyzed in order to identify which inputs (determined within the Community Dental Services) or external factors outside the control of the Community Dental Services are associated with efficiency. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Relative efficiency rankings in Community Dental Services production of dental healthcare. RESULTS: Using the quantity of treatments delivered as the measure of output, on average the Community Dental Services in England is operating at a relative efficiency of 85% (95% confidence interval 77%- 99%) compared to the best performing services. Average efficiency is lower when courses of treatment and unique patients seen are used as output measures, 82% and 68% respectively. Neither the input mix nor the patient case mix explained variations in the efficiency across Community Dental Services. CONCLUSIONS: Although large variations in performance exist across Community Dental Services, the data available was not able to explain these variations. A useful next step would be to undertake detailed case studies of several best and under-performing services to explore the factors that influence relative performance levels.

Longitudinal Study of Caries Development from Childhood to Adolescence.

The World Health Organization (WHO) stated that globally, dental caries is the most important oral condition. To develop effective prevention strategies requires an understanding of how this condition develops and progresses over time, but there are few longitudinal studies of caries onset and progression in children. The aim of the study was to establish the pattern of caries development from childhood into adolescence and to explore the role of potential risk factors (age, sex, ethnicity, and social deprivation). Of particular interest was the disease trajectory of dentinal caries in the permanent teeth in groups defined by the presence or absence of dentinal caries in the primary teeth. Intraoral examinations to assess oral health were performed at 4 time points by trained and calibrated dentist examiners using a standardized, national diagnostic protocol. Clinical data were available from 6,651 children. Mean caries prevalence (% D3MFT > 0) was 16.7% at the first clinical examination (ages 7-9 y), increasing to 31.0%, 42.2%, and 45.7% at subsequent examinations. A population-averaged model (generalized estimating equations) was used to model the longitudinal data. Estimated mean values indicated a rising D3MFT count as pupils aged (consistent with new teeth emerging), which was significantly higher (4.49 times; 95% confidence interval, 3.90-5.16) in those pupils with caries in their primary dentition than in those without. This study is one of the few large longitudinal studies to report the development of dental caries from childhood into adolescence. Children who developed caries in their primary dentition had a very different caries trajectory in their permanent dentition compared to their caries-free contemporaries. In light of these results, caries-free and caries-active children should be considered as 2 separate populations, suggesting different prevention strategies are required to address their different risk profiles.

Cost-Effectiveness of Caries Prevention in Practice: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

A 2-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial measured the cost-effectiveness of caries prevention in caries-free children aged 2 to 3 y attending general practice. The setting was 22 dental practices in Northern Ireland. Participants were centrally randomized into intervention (22,600 ppm fluoride varnish, toothbrush, a 50-mL tube of 1,450 ppm fluoride toothpaste, and standardized prevention advice) and control (advice only), both provided at 6-monthly intervals during a 3-y follow-up. The primary outcome measure was conversion from caries-free to caries-active states assessed by calibrated and blinded examiners; secondary outcome measures included decayed, missing, or filled teeth surfaces (dmfs); pain; and extraction. Cumulative costs were related to each of the trial's outcomes in a series of incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses examined the impact of using dentist's time as measured by observation rather than that reported by the dentist. The costs of applying topical fluoride were also estimated assuming the work was undertaken by dental nurses or hygienists rather than dentists. A total of 1,248 children (624 randomized to each group) were recruited, and 1,096 (549 in the intervention group and 547 in the control group) were included in the final analyses. The mean difference in direct health care costs between groups was £107.53 (£155.74 intervention, £48.21 control, P < 0.05) per child. When all health care costs were compared, the intervention group's mean cost was £212.56 more than the control group (£987.53 intervention, £774.97 control, P < 0.05). Statistically significant differences in outcomes were only detected with respect to carious surfaces. The mean cost per carious surface avoided was estimated at £251 (95% confidence interval, £454.39-£79.52). Sensitivity analyses did not materially affect the study's findings. This trial raises concerns about the cost-effectiveness of a fluoride-based intervention delivered at the practice level in the context of a state-funded dental service (EudraCT No: 2009-010725-39; ISRCTN: ISRCTN36180119).

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Caries Prevention in Dental Practice.

We conducted a parallel group randomized controlled trial of children initially aged 2 to 3 y who were caries free, to prevent the children becoming caries active over the subsequent 36 mo. The setting was 22 dental practices in Northern Ireland, and children were randomly assigned by a clinical trials unit (CTU) (using computer-generated random numbers, with allocation concealed from the dental practice until each child was recruited) to the intervention (22,600-ppm fluoride varnish, toothbrush, 50-mL tube of 1,450 ppm fluoride toothpaste, and standardized, evidence-based prevention advice) or advice-only control at 6-monthly intervals. The primary outcome measure was conversion from caries-free to caries-active states. Secondary outcome measures were number of decayed, missing, or filled teeth (dmfs) in caries-active children, number of episodes of pain, and number of extracted teeth. Adverse reactions were recorded. Calibrated external examiners, blinded to the child's study group, assessed the status of the children at baseline and after 3 y. In total, 1,248 children (624 randomized to each group) were recruited, and 1,096 (549 intervention, 547 control) were included in the final analyses. Eighty-seven percent of intervention and 86% of control children attended every 6-mo visit ( P = 0.77). A total of 187 (34%) in the intervention group converted to caries active compared to 213 (39%) in the control group (odds ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.04; P = 0.11). Mean dmfs of those with caries in the intervention group was 7.2 compared to 9.6 in the control group ( P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the number of episodes of pain between groups ( P = 0.81) or in the number of teeth extracted in caries-active children ( P = 0.95). Ten children in the intervention group had adverse reactions of a minor nature. This well-conducted trial failed to demonstrate that the intervention kept children caries free, but there was evidence that once children get caries, it slowed down its progression (EudraCT No: 2009-010725-39; ISRCTN: ISRCTN36180119).

A national survey of the public's views on quality in dental care.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of evidence and poor understanding of quality measurement and improvement in dentistry. The aim of this study was to undertake a nationally representative survey of the public in England to explore their views on the meaning of quality in dentistry. METHODS: A cross sectional survey of the adult population (18 years and over) of England was undertaken. A sample size of 500 was set to provide a precision to plus or minus 5% after allowing for item non-response. A quota sampling approach was used, with predetermined quotas set for sex, age, working status and tenure to ensure the sample was nationally representative. Question selection and design were informed by the literature and a series of interviews with the public. Simple content analysis was used to identify themes in the responses to open questions. Dental service use, gender, age, ethnicity and social class were recorded. Frequency distributions were computed and outputs were cross-tabulated with various population sub-group categories. RESULTS: Five hundred and thirteen people were interviewed. Approximately 20% of patients reported that their care was suboptimal; a third thought it was poor value for money and 20% did not trust their dentist. Good interpersonal communication, politeness and being put at ease were the most important factors that elicited positive responses. Negative factors were cost of care and waiting times. In making an assessment of quality, access (40% of all responses), technical quality of care (35%), professionalism (30%), hygiene/cleanliness (30%), staff attitude (27%), pain-free treatment (23%), value for money (22%), and staff putting patients at ease (21%) all emerged as important factors. CONCLUSIONS: Quality in dentistry is multi-dimensional in nature, and includes different elements and emphases to other areas of healthcare. The results will inform the development of a measure of quality in dentistry.

Repair vs replacement of failed restorations in general dental practice: factors influencing treatment choices and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of repair vs replacement of failed restorations on patient related outcome measures, and to explore the clinical factors that influence this decision. DESIGN: Multicentre, prospective practice-based study. SETTING: Dental practices within Salford, Trafford and East Lancashire in the North West of England. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: General dental practitioners were asked to participate and to recruit adult patients attending for routine dental treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Repair or replacement of failed restorations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dental anxiety before treatment using the Corah Dental Anxiety Scale and pain intensity immediately and 24 hours post-operatively using the McGill short form pain questionnaire. Operative outcomes included depth of caries, time taken to complete the procedure, use of local anaesthetic and dental material used. RESULTS: Of the 103 patients diagnosed with a failed restoration, a statistically significantly greater number underwent replacement than repair (p = 0.004). Patients undergoing repairs were significantly less anxious (p = 0.008) and had shorter procedure times (p = 0.044). Repairs were associated with minimal caries depth and less use of local anaesthetic. CONCLUSION: Failed restorations should be repaired where clinically possible, as they are quick and associated with less patient anxiety. Future research should focus on providing high quality prospective data evaluating the longevity of repaired vs replaced restorations.

The efficacy of screening for common dental diseases by hygiene-therapists: a diagnostic test accuracy study.

Regularly attending adult patients are increasingly asymptomatic and not in need of treatment when attending for their routine dental examinations. As oral health improves further, using the general dental practitioner to undertake the "checkup" on regular "low-risk" patients represents a substantial and potentially unnecessary cost for state-funded systems. Given recent regulatory changes in the United Kingdom, it is now theoretically possible to delegate a range of tasks to hygiene-therapists. This has the potential to release the general dental practitioner's time and increase the capacity to care. The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic test accuracy of hygiene-therapists when screening for dental caries and periodontal disease in regularly attending asymptomatic adults who attend for their checkup. A visual screen by hygiene-therapists acted as the index test, and the general dental practitioner acted as the reference standard. Consenting asymptomatic adult patients, who were regularly attending patients at 10 practices across the Northwest of England, entered the study. Both sets of clinicians made an assessment of dental caries and periodontal disease. The primary outcomes measured were the sensitivity and specificity values for dental caries and periodontal disease. In total, 1899 patients were screened. The summary point for sensitivity of dental care professionals when screening for caries and periodontal disease was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.87) and 0.89 (0.86 to 0.92), respectively. The summary point for specificity of dental care professionals when screening for caries and periodontal disease was 0.87 (0.78 to 0.92) and 0.75 (0.66 to 0.82), respectively. The results suggest that hygiene-therapists could be used to screen for dental caries and periodontal disease. This has important ramifications for service design in public-funded health systems.

Patient safety in primary care dentistry: where are we now?

In contemporary healthcare settings, ensuring patient safety must be an underlying principal through which systems, teams, individuals and environments work in tandem to strive for. The adoption of a culture in the NHS where patient safety is given greater priority is key to improvement. Recent events at Mid-Staffordshire hospitals among others have brought patient safety into the minds of the public and it increasingly demands attention from clinicians, the press and governments. However, much of the work into patient safety has been completed in the secondary care field with very little work completed in primary care settings. In primary care dentistry, improving patient safety is a relatively new concept with a distinct lack of evidence base. In this article, we discuss what patient safety is and debate its relevance to primary care dentistry. We also look at previous work completed in this field and make recommendations for future work to address the current lack of research.

Direct access: lessons learnt from the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: To use a qualitative approach to examine the perceptions of policy makers, general dental practitioners, dental hygienists, dental students and dental hygiene students in the Netherlands following the introduction of a direct access policy in 2006. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were undertaken with a variety of policy makers and clinicians in the Netherlands. These were recorded and transcribed verbatim into MS Word documents. The transcripts were line numbered and subjected to thematic analysis to develop a coding frame using NVivo. RESULTS: Four main themes are reported, which represent a subset of a policy analysis of direct access in the Netherlands. These were entitled: 'The narrative of implementation', 'Working models of direct access', 'Relationship between old- and new-style hygienists' and 'Public attitudes'. CONCLUSIONS: Working relationships within integrated practices in the Netherlands are positive, but attitudes towards independent practice are mixed. Good examples of collaborative working across practices were observed, but relationships between the professional bodies remain difficult seven years on since the introduction of the policy.

How do we improve quality in primary dental care?

Quality improvement differs from quality assurance (which is retrospective in nature) in that it attempts to use a quality assessment cycle and focuses on the organisation or system of production as a whole. In this paper, the third in a series of three published in this Journal, we discuss the concept and evidence base of quality improvement, the main approaches that have been used in other healthcare settings and the importance of a multi-faceted strategy to address this issue. These topics are then related to the context of primary dental care and the way dentistry currently addresses quality improvement. Finally, we set out an agenda and provide recommendations for a system-based quality improvement strategy for primary dental care and identify the likely barriers and facilitators for this approach.

How do we measure quality in primary dental care?

In the second paper of a series exploring quality in primary dental care a way to measure quality in dentistry is considered. Unless there are valid and reliable tools to measure quality then quality can never be improved. Measurement tools need to be acceptable to patients if they are to be employed, as well as to busy practices in terms of practicality and costs. Examples such as the General Medical Practitioner's Quality Outcome Framework need to be understood to see if they can be translated to dentistry.

What is quality primary dental care?

In the first paper of a series exploring quality in primary dental care a definition for quality in dentistry is sought. There is a little agreement in academic literature as to what quality really means in primary dental care and without a true understanding it is difficult to measure and improve quality in a systematic way. 'Quality' of healthcare in dentistry will mean different things to practitioners, policy makers and patients but a framework could be modelled on other definitions within different healthcare sectors, with focus on access, equity and overall healthcare experience.

The views of examiners on the use of intra-oral photographs to detect dental caries in epidemiological studies.

AIM: The aim of the study was to obtain the views of examiners on their experience of using intra-oral photographs as a means of detecting caries in epidemiological studies compared to an established visual examination method. METHOD: A focus group discussion was conducted with five examiners experienced in an established visual examination method after they had performed visual dental examinations of a sample of children as well as assessed intra-oral photographs of the same children. RESULTS: The time taken by examiners to assess intraoral photographs becomes extended when compared to performing a visual examination. The ability to assess intra-oral photographs on a screen at a convenient time and place was considered advantageous. The examiners found it easier to make caries detection decisions on intra-oral photographs of primary teeth than permanent teeth. Adequate removal of debris and moisture control prior to obtaining the photographs were considered important. CONCLUSION: The views of examiners in this study suggest that to improve the utility of photographic method, further research is needed to determine adequate drying methods for use in the field. Consideration should be given to a time-limited, standardised presentation of the photographs including the size and resolution. Specific training on caries detection from photographs is also required.

What is clinical leadership and why might it be important in dentistry?

The concept of leadership means different things to different people. At present there is no single definition of leadership nor an established theoretical approach. Despite this, leadership in the clinical environment is becoming increasingly cited as an important component in the transition of the National Health Service (NHS) and in the development of clinician led services. In medicine, clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) will soon be operational and the Department of Health (DH) seeks to establish a similar approach in dentistry, where local clinicians drive forward a quality agenda with a focus on patient outcomes. To facilitate this, the NHS Commissioning Board (NHSCB) are in the process of developing Local Professional Networks (LPNs) for dentistry. Given this shift towards localism and clinician led services it would appear that leadership will have a significant role in both medicine and dentistry. This paper explores what leadership is, before determining why it might be important in providing a clinician-led, patient-based and outcomes-focused service.

Children's views on the experience of a visual examination and intra-oral photographs to detect dental caries in epidemiological studies.

AIM: To elicit children's views on the established visual examination method used for the epidemiological surveillance of dental caries and an experimental intra-oral photographic examination method. METHOD: Focus group interviews were conducted with 5-year-olds (with the aid of a puppet) and 10/11-year-olds (without puppet) after experiencing both methods. Ten focus groups were conducted in each cohort. RESULTS: The children's views on the methods related to the acceptability of their experience. The key factors affecting acceptability and preferences related to the combined effects of contextual factors prior to the examination and experiences during the examination. These included communication and children's expectations. These factors influenced the examination experience along with their feelings about the environment and the tactile sensation from instruments in the mouth. Most children preferred the experimental photographic method as a means of caries detection over the traditional visual examination. They also wanted feedback on their oral health and more communication on what was happening during the examination. CONCLUSION Appropriate communication, attention to the examination environment and handling of instruments can enhance the dental examination experience for children in the school setting. The children's preferences indicated that generally, the intra-oral camera was well received as a means of caries detection for epidemiological studies within the school setting. These results may have implications for seeking ethical approval and conducting epidemiological studies on children in the future.