The conceptualization of childhood in North American pediatric dentistry texts: a discursive case study analysis

Enhancing children's participation in dental research: A commentary

The concept of childhood has evolved over the years, inspired by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989, shifting from developmental models to a conception of childhood that recognizes children as moral agents. This evolution highlights the importance of respecting children's agency and their right to be heard in matters that are related to them. In conventional health research, however, children's voices are often inadequately accessed. In this commentary, we discuss the imperative to recognize children's agency in dental research and a shift from research on children to research with and by children. Moreover, we underscore the importance of actively seeking and listening to children's voices and recognizing their agency in shaping research and healthcare practices in the field of dentistry. Further, we explore the application of participatory research approaches in dental research and provide examples of studies that have involved children in various capacities. We conclude this commentary by emphasizing the potential benefits of participatory research in both qualitative and quantitative dental studies to promote deeper understanding, clearer communication, and stronger advocacy regarding children's interests. Primarily, we call for greater recognition of children's agency in dental research and advocate for more inclusive and child-centred research methodologies.

Critically engaging vulnerability: Rethinking oral health with vulnerabilized populations

This paper is the third in a series of narrative reviews challenging core concepts in oral health research and practice. Our series started with a framework for Inclusion Oral Health. Our second review explored one component of this framework, looking at how intersectionality adds important complexity to oral public health. This current manuscript drills into a second component of Inclusion Oral Health, exploring how labels can lead to 'othering' thereby misrepresenting populations and (re)producing harms. Specifically, we address a common oral public health label: vulnerable populations. This term is commonly used descriptively: an adjective (vulnerable) is used to modify a noun (population). What this descriptor conceals is the 'how,' 'why,' and 'therefore' that leads to and from vulnerability: How and why is a population made vulnerable; to what are they vulnerable; what makes them 'at risk,' and to what are they 'at risk'? In concealing these questions, we argue our conventional approach unwittingly does harm. Vulnerability is a term that implies a population has inherent characteristics that make them vulnerable; further, it casts populations as discrete, homogenous entities, thereby misrepresenting the complexities that people live. In so doing, this label can eclipse the strengths, agency and power of individuals and populations to care for themselves and each other. Regarding oral public health, the convention of vulnerability averts our research gaze away from social processes that produce vulnerability to instead focus on the downstream product, the vulnerable population. This paper theorizes vulnerability for oral public health, critically engaging its production and reproduction. Drawing from critical public health literature and disability studies, we advance a critique of vulnerability to make explicit hidden assumptions and their harmful outcomes. We propose solutions for research and practice, including co-engagement and co-production with peoples who have been vulnerabilized. In so doing, this paper moves forward the potential for oral public health to advance research and practice that engages complexity in our work with vulnerabilized populations.

Physical Constraint in Pediatric Dentistry: The Lived Experience of Parents

Background:

The use of physical constraint in pediatric dentistry is highly controversial. Papoose boards in particular, which envelop and immobilize children during treatment procedures, have been described as barbaric devices even though their goal is to protect the patient. In this debate, the voice of parents is important but still missing in the scientific literature.

Aim:

To understand how parents or caregivers experienced physical constraint and the use of the papoose board on their children during regular dental treatment.

Design:

We conducted qualitative research rooted in interpretive phenomenology. Accordingly, we performed in-depth individual interviews with a purposive sample of 7 parents or caregivers. The interviews took place in Montréal, Canada, after the children had been treated with a papoose board for nonemergency dental treatments. The discussions were audio recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed.

Results:

Two perspectives emerged among participants. Some explained that the papoose board calmed their children, helped the dentist to complete the procedures, and made their experience less stressful. For others, the papoose board was a horrible and traumatizing experience, leading to feelings of guilt toward their children. They expressed anger toward the dentists for not allowing them enough time to decide and for imposing use of the device.

Conclusion

Our study raises serious ethical concerns about this practice. We believe that using a papoose board should remain an extraordinary measure and, more generally, that dental professionals should reflect on the place of children and their families in clinical encounters.

Knowledge Transfer Statement:

The findings of this study should encourage policy makers, dental professionals and ethicists to consider the following points: 1) the traumatizing experiences described by parents raise serious ethical concerns about the use of papoose boards; 2) the dental profession should reflect on the place of children and their families in the clinical encounter and grapple with the importance of consent and how to ensure consent in encounters involving children and their parents.

Minimally Invasive Dentistry: Parent/Carer Perspectives on Atraumatic Restorative Treatments and Dental General Anaesthesia to the Management of Early Childhood Caries

Introduction: Parents of children treated under dental general anaesthesia (DGA) have reported feelings of concern and anxiety. This study elicited the views of parents/carers (P/C) of children with early childhood caries (ECC) who participated in a randomised trial (core study) which tested the effectiveness of care under DGA or care using alternative minimally invasive Atraumatic Restorative Treatment and the Hall Technique approaches (ART/HT).

Methods: P/C of children treated using the ART/HT (test) approach or care under a DGA (control) were interviewed. Focus group semi-structured interviews with P/C were undertaken in community facilities. The transcripts were read and inductively coded into domains to identify emergent themes. The codes were entered into NVivo software to assist data management and were further refined into broad themes.

Results: Seven grouped interviews with 14 participants were conducted and one test participant provided a written response. Four groups with eight test participants; two groups with four control participants; and one combined group with one test and one control participant were interviewed. Five broad themes emerged after thematic analysis: (1) Impacts on the child and the family; (2) Child-/family-centred care; (3) Timeliness of care; (4) Affordable care; (5) Accessible care. Impacts were related to that of the effects of the disease, and of the care for the disease. Child-centred/family-centred care (CCC) was a source of appreciation by P/C of both groups when it was experienced. Frustration at the lack of timely care of their child's treatment needs, coupled with the perceived expensiveness of care and difficulties in physically getting to the location for a specialist consultation was expressed by P/Cs in the study.

Discussion: The use of the ART/HT enabled the establishment of a relationship between the clinical team and the child and P/C which was central to the delivery of CCC. P/Cs in the DGA arm of the study expressed dissatisfaction more often with the issues of timely care, cost of care and accessibility of care. P/C of both groups were equally satisfied with the treatment, where treatment had been received in a timely, child-centred manner.

Conclusion: The findings suggest that minimally invasive approaches which facilitated CCC are acceptable alternative options to the DGA and should be considered for the management of ECC.

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12616001124426.

Group Peer Review

Invitation to review a manuscript for publication marks an exciting milestone in graduate and postgraduate students’ training. Yet, peer reviewing is seldom explicitly taught. First-time reviewers approaching this task often lack mentorship, guidelines, and confidence. The ongoing debate about how to judge the quality of qualitative research can further complicate the task. In this article, we introduce an innovative model for conducting group peer reviews in the context of qualitative research training. After setting out the model's principles and process, we discuss its merits and reflect on our experiences as trainees and supervisor using the approach. In addition to providing opportunities for mentorship in appraisal methods, writing strategies, and approaches for framing constructive feedback, we suggest the model has the potential to advance trainees’ development as collegial peers and their overall learning as qualitative researchers. Finally, we discuss potential ways forward to extend the model in other contexts.