Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
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".