Education, certification system and extent of duty in dental hygienists of developed countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives : The purpose of the study is to investigate the education, certification system, and extent of duty of dental hygienist between Korea and five developed countries including United States, Canada, England, Australia, and Japan. Methods : Internet based access to five developed countries was made and the analysis was done for the definition of occupation, main duties, similar occupations, education policy, job descriptions, license certification system, standards of duty, Q & A management, current status of obtaining certification, and scope of work. Results : United States has a two-year associate degree(AS) and a four-year bachelor degree(BS). Canada has two to three years degree and a two-year course is accepted in england and Australia. In the meanwhile, Korea and Japan have two-year and four-year educational courses. The duty of dental hygienists includes the prevention education for dental health and continuing dental health care. Most of the dental hygienists in Korea and Japan play the assistant roles for the dental surgeons. United States has national board examinations including written examinations, practical examinations, and computer assisted examination. Written and practical examinations are also conducted in Korea. England and Australia have the recognized educational organizations for qualification. Conclusions : Problem based and problem solving skills are the most important in dental hygienist education in Korea. The training of highly competent dental hygienists must be done for the improvement of dental hygiene in Korea in the near future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".