Access to Deep Sedation and General Anasesthesia Services for Dental Patients: A Survey of Ontario Dentists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Many patients need deep sedation or general anaesthesia (DS/GA) to undergo dental treatment as a result of fear, anxiety, disability, invasive dentistry, medical illness, or age. Objective: To assess barriers in accessing DS/GA as identified by dentists. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to Ontario dentists (n=5507). Descriptive and regression analyses were performed. Results: With a response rate of 18.3%, one quarter (24.8%) of those surveyed report inadequate access to DS/GA. Those outside the Greater Toronto Area and in rural communities had higher odds of reporting this outcome. General dentists, part-time dentists, urban dentists, and dentists >64 years-old had higher odds of not utilizing DS/GA. Common reasons for not utilizing GA were lack of perceived need and additional costs. Dentists that utilize DS/GA indicate that additional patient costs represent the greatest barrier to care. Conclusion: Access to DS/GA in Ontario is not uniform and major barriers to care exist.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".