Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This paper considers how dentistry has developed in the United Kingdom (UK) over the last 60 years and concludes that dentists have failed to be proactive and to shape the systems for the delivery of an optimal level of care to the population. It suggests that there is a need for far better leadership and for dentists, as individuals and as a profession, to rediscover the sense of vision that they once had and to shape their destinies, rather than accepting the current situation. The author goes on to explain how this might be done. Since the inception of the National Health Service (NHS), the dental profession in the UK has, to a large extent, been dominated by the politics of the NHS, by changing fee structures and contracts, by reports from the Review Body on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration (DDRB), and by strategies adopted by successive governments, especially during the last two decades. These strategies have resulted in cohorts of disillusioned dental practitioners reducing their commitment to, or opting out of, NHS contracts and committing themselves, to a greater or lesser extent, to private practice. It is now over three years since, for the first time, the proportion of dentistry provided under private contact in the UK, as measured by gross fees, exceeded that provided under NHS contract. The profession has shown a remarkable lack of imagination in organising itself to provide the best kind of care for patients. Instead of being proactive and visionary, it has allowed itself to become a political football. This has led to the progressive deskilling of many practitioners, and a manifest failure to secure the long-term oral health of patients. This paper considers how the situation could be improved and looks at four aspects, which are: 1. 21st century dentistry: state of the art versus reality? The contrast between what is clinically possible and what the profession currently delivers. 2. What are we here for? The need for a new vision for dentistry, the profession and the future, and the need for a new sense of mission. 3. A responsibility for the profession. The responsibility of the profession for providing patients (and funding bodies) with advice. 4. Leading the way: a new-look personal development plan. The personal development needs of dentists, with much more emphasis on interpersonal and leadership skills.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle