Prenuptial Dental Extractions in Acadian Women: First Report of a Cultural Tradition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prenuptial tooth extractions, extractions of all teeth in at least one dental arch before marriage, are not identified in the dental literature. Driven by a professional encounter, the purpose of this study was to confirm the existence of this practice among Acadian women. METHODS: An 8-item survey instrument with space for comments was mailed to 182 dentists from traditionally Acadian regions of Canada. The survey was provided in English and French. RESULTS: Ninety dentists responded (50.3%); 8 of them (9%) had been asked to perform prenuptial extractions, and an additional 9 volunteered awareness of this practice. Awareness and requests were associated with dental practice in a county with a ≥20% French-speaking population. CONCLUSIONS: Prenuptial extractions in this population have been confirmed by the current cohort of dentists. The potential public health, clinical, and systemic health research implications for women who are edentulous for most of their adult life merit further study. Additionally, it is important to determine if interventions are needed to curtail cultural expectations of such practices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".