Does dental health of 6-year-olds reflect the reform of the Israeli dental care system?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The National health insurance law enacted in 1995 did not include dental care in its basket of services. Dental care for children was first included in 2010, initially up till 8 years of age. The eligibility age rose to 12 years in 2013. The dental survey of 6 year-olds in 2007 found that the average of decayed, missing and filled teeth index (dmft) was 3.31 and 35 % of children were caries free. The current cross sectional survey of dental health for 6 year-olds was conducted as a comparison to the pre-reform status. METHODS: Twenty-three local authorities were randomly selected nationwide. Two Grade 1 classes were randomly chosen in each. The city of Jerusalem was also included in the survey because of its size. The children were examined according to the WHO Oral Health Survey Methods 4th ed protocol. The dental caries index for deciduous teeth (dmft: decayed, missing, filled teeth) was calculated. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred ten children were examined. 61.7 % of the children suffered from dental decay and only 38.3 % were caries free. The mean dmft was 2.56; d = 1.41 (teeth with untreated caries), f = 1.15 (teeth damaged by decay and restored), virtually none were missing due to caries. Dental caries prevalence was rather consistent, an average of over 2 teeth affected per child. Although there is no major change in comparison to former surveys, there is more treated than untreated disease. In the present survey the f component is higher than in the past, especially in the Jewish sector where it is the main component. It is still lower in the Arab sector. CONCLUSIONS: Although the level of dental disease remained rather constant, an increase in the treatment component was observed. In order to reduce caries prevalence, preventive measures such as school dental services and drinking water fluoridation should be extended and continued. Primary preventive dental services should be established for children from birth, with an emphasis on primary health care and educational settings, such as family health centers and kindergartens.
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 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 | 0,007 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, 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 ».