Why do we need an oral health care policy in Canada?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although health care is a right of citizenship, severe inequities in oral health and access to care persist. This paper provides information on the financing, organization and delivery of oral health services in Canada. It concludes that dental care has largely fallen out of consideration as health care. The increasing costs of dental insurance and disparities in oral health and access to care threaten the system"s sustainability. The legislation that allows the insured to receive tax-free care and requires all taxpayers to subsidize that expenditure is socially unjust. Unless an alternative direction is taken, dentistry will lose its relevance as a profession working for the public good and this will be followed by further erosion of public support for dental education and research. However, never before have we had the opportunity presented by high levels of oral health, the extensive resources already allocated to oral health care, plus the support of other organizations to allow us to consider what else we might do. One of the first steps would be to establish new models for the delivery of preventive measures and care that reach out to those who do not now enjoy access.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".