Author
Listed:
- Joshua Lim
- Adam C Carle
- Richard M Carpiano
- Donald L Chi
Abstract
The goal of this study was to evaluate the associations between topical fluoride hesitancy and opposition to determine if hesitancy is a potential precursor to opposition. We administered an 85-item survey (11/2020-09/2021) to 1,135 caregivers that included the 20-item, 5-domain Fluoride Hesitancy Identification Tool (FHIT), from which we created five domain-specific scores of topical fluoride hesitancy (none/moderate/high for each domain); a score reflecting any topical fluoride hesitancy (moderate/high on any of the five domains); and a topical fluoride hesitancy severity score (total number of moderate/high responses to the five domains; range 0–5). The survey measured degree of topical fluoride opposition (0–10 with no = 0 and yes ≥ 1). We ran confounder-adjusted logistic regression models to evaluate associations between topical fluoride hesitancy scores and opposition. The analyses included 1,042 caregivers; mean age was 42.0 years (SD: 8.3), 78.7% were woman, and 58.3% were white. General hesitancy was reported by 82.9% of surveyed caregivers. Domain-specific hesitancy prevalence (moderate/high) was 81.3% for the necessity domain, 31.3% for chemicals, 19.5% for harm, 30.1% for uncertainty, and 25.2% for distrust. For severity, 14.7% of caregivers reported moderate/high hesitancy for all 5 domains, 7.7% for 4, 6.8% for 3, 9.3% for 2, and 43.9% for 1 domain. Opposition was reported by 39.1%. In the regression models, every hesitancy measure had a statistically significant (p
Suggested Citation
Joshua Lim & Adam C Carle & Richard M Carpiano & Donald L Chi, 2025.
"Topical fluoride hesitancy and opposition are significantly and positively associated: A cross-sectional study,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(4), pages 1-14, April.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0322027
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0322027
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0322027. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.