Dental care access among individuals with Down syndrome in France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare levels of dental care utilization, receipt of dental services, and oral hygiene habits between a sample of individuals with Down syndrome (DS) and their siblings. Data were collected by means of a recently validated, French-language, questionnaire measured of oral health and its related problems for individuals with DS. A cross-sectional survey was undertaken of parents of children with DS attending a national meeting for families and carers of individuals with DS in France. Older individuals with DS were significantly more likely to visit a dentist regularly than their older non-DS siblings, but the group with DS was significantly less likely to have received any dental treatment. The group with DS was significantly more likely to have difficulty finding both medical and dental services. Parents were nearly twice as likely to report problems finding dental services for their child with DS as they were medical services. In a multiple logistic regression analysis within the DS group, it was found that older age, regular speech therapy and ophthalmology consultations, and reports of no difficulty finding a dentist were independently associated with increased odds for regular dental consultations. Analysis of the findings suggests that the parents of children with DS in France frequently encounter problems of access to oral health care and that individuals with DS are less likely to receive dental services than are their non-DS siblings.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".