Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To document the trends in expenditures on dental health care services and the number of dental health care professionals in Canada from 1990 to 1999. METHODS: Information on dental and health expenditures, numbers of dentists, hygienists and dental therapists, and the population of Canada and the provinces were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information; data on numbers of denturists were obtained from regional bodies and from Health Canada. Information on the costs of other disease categories was taken from studies by Health Canada (1993 and 1998). International comparisons were made on the basis of data published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Indices of change over the decade (in which the 1990 value served as the baseline [100]) were calculated. RESULTS: By 1999, the supply of all types of dental care providers had increased to 1 for every 904 people. Dental expenditures during the 1990s increased by 64% overall and by 49% per capita, a rate of increase that exceeded both inflation and costs of health care. Although the public share of dental costs decreased from 9.2% to 5.8%, the direct costs of dental care increased to rank second (6.30 billion dollars) after those for cardiovascular diseases (6.82 billion dollars). Among the OECD nations, Canada had the fourth highest per capita dental expenditures and the second lowest per capita public dental expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: The direct economic costs of dental conditions increased during the 1990s from 4.13 billion dollars to 6.77 billion dollars. Over the same period, the public share for expenditures on dental health care services declined.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.049 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".