A review of the global literature on dental therapists
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Access to adequate oral health care is deficient in many parts of the world. Many countries are now using dental therapists to increase access, particularly for children. To inform the discussion on dental therapists in the workforce, particularly in the United States, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation funded a review of the global literature to identify as many documents as possible related to the practice of dental therapists since the establishment of the School Dental Service in New Zealand in 1921. METHODS: Consultants in each of the countries considered to have a substantive literature on dental therapists were asked to participate in the research; seventeen in total. In addition to identifying and reviewing published articles, a focus of the research was on identifying 'gray' documents. Standard databases were searched for key words associated with dental therapists. In addition, searches were conducted of the governmental and dental association websites of all countries known to have dental therapists in their oral health workforce. RESULTS: Fifty-four countries, both developing and developed, were identified where dental therapists are members of the workforce. Eleven hundred documents were identified from 26 of these countries, with over 2/3 of them cited in the published monograph. Reliable evidence from the related literature and verbal communication confirmed the utilization of dental therapists in an additional 28 countries. Thirty-three of the countries were members of the Commonwealth of Nations, suggesting a mechanism of spread from New Zealand. Variable lengths of training/education existed for dental therapists with the tradition being 2 years postsecondary. In a few countries, the training of therapists and hygienists is now being combined in a three academic year program. Historically, dental therapists have been employed by government agencies caring for children, typically in school-based programs. Initiatives in some countries allow limited care for adults by dental therapists with additional training. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence indicates that dental therapists provide effective, quality, and safe care for children in an economical manner and are generally accepted both by the public and where their use is established, by the dental profession.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,026 | 0,039 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,002 |
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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».