Use of Dental Care by Elderly Chinese Immigrants in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study examines the predictors for elderly Chinese immigrants' use of dental care services. METHODS: In 2003, a study entitled "Health and Well Being of Older Chinese in Canada" collected data from seven cities in which 2,272 Chinese Canadians aged 55 years and older were surveyed. Data from 1,537 of these individuals were used to examine the use of dental care services by the elderly Chinese. Hierarchical logistic regression analysis was used to examine the predicting factors for use of dental care. RESULTS: More than half (52.1 percent) of the elder Chinese immigrants did not use any dental care services within the past year of the study. Being older, living in Quebec, and having poorer physical health reduced the probability that an older Chinese immigrant would use dental care services. On the other hand, being an immigrant from Hong Kong, having lived in Canada for a longer period of time, strong social support, and having dental problems increase the probability of dental service use. DISCUSSION: The findings support the need for considering the cultural characteristics and background of elderly Chinese immigrants when strengthening oral health promotion. This should encompass understanding of the holistic concept of health that includes oral health and its connections with other physical health issues.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".