Oral health care in long‐term care facilities for elderly people in southern Brazil: a conceptual framework
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To present a theoretical model for understanding oral health care for the elderly in the context of long-term care institutions (LTCI). METHODS: Open-ended individual interviews were conducted with the elderly residing in LTCI, their carers, nursing technicians and nurses, directors of care, dental surgeons and managers of public health services. A grounded theory methodological approach was adopted for data collection and analysis. RESULTS: The emerging core category revealed a basic social process: 'Promoting oral health care for the elderly based on the context of LTCI'. This process was composed of two contradicting yet correlated aspects: the oral health care does not minimise the poor oral epidemiological condition, and at the same time, there was a continued improvement in the oral care expressed by better care practices. These aspects were related to the: attribution of meaning to oral health, social determination of oral health, the ageing process, interactions established in the oral health care practices, oral health care management in LTCI, inclusion of oral health care into the political-organisational dimension and possibility of conjecturing better oral health care practices. CONCLUSION: The core concept of 'Promotion of oral health care for elderly people based on the context of LTCI' is capable of explaining the variations in the structure and process of LTCI, as well as in helping to understand the meaning of the oral health care practices for the institutionalised elderly.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it