MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052097642 · doi:10.1308/135576110791654829

Dentistry as a Business: In Search of the Moral High Ground

2010· article· en· W2052097642 on OpenAlex
Vernon P Holt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePrimary Dental Care · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Education, Practice, Research
Canadian institutionsNorfolk General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificatePublic relationsRelation (database)Service (business)MedicinePsychologyPolitical scienceSociologyMedical educationBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper has been developed from a version originally submitted as an assignment for the Faculty of General Dental Practice (UK) Certificate in Health Services Leadership and Management Course. It has been revised in the light of the independent review led by Professor Jimmy Steele into National Health Service dental services in England (generally referred to as the Steele Report), which has commented on many of the points dealt with here. The paper addresses issues arising from a moral tension often experienced by dentists between the professional desire to serve patients well and the necessity, as practice owners running a business, to survive financially. The need for honest and open recognition of what is truly achievable from the public purse is stressed. Rights and responsibilities are discussed in relation to professional practitioners, their patients, and society in general, in seeking the moral high ground under different funding arrangements. The paper concludes by stressing the need to offer improved health rather than palliation of disease.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.399 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it