MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075704440 · doi:10.1353/hpu.2011.0097

Potentially Preventable Hospital Use for Dental Conditions: Implications for Expanding Dental Coverage for Low Income Populations

2011· article· en· W2075704440 on OpenAlex
Carlos Quiñonez, Luciano Ieraci, Astrid Guttmann

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Ontario
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDental careLow incomeHealth careGovernment (linguistics)MedicineEnvironmental healthMedical emergencyBusinessFamily medicineEconomic growthSocioeconomicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, attention has been placed on the issue of poor access to dental care, and the implications this may have for health care systems, in particular emergency department use for basic dental problems. In 2006, approximately 26,000 of 12 million Ontarians used acute-care hospital services for select dental problems, representing a cost of $16.4 million. There were 964 hospital admissions. The majority of use is by low-income adults. Although better access to dental care may lessen this burden on the health care system, the potential costs averted are considerably less than current proposals to improve access to dental care for low-income groups in Canada. Justifying renewed government investments in dental care in economic terms will require a broader assessment of costs; these data provide a starting-point for policymakers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.296 · 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