Factors Associated With Access to Dental Services of Adults With Physical Disabilities in Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine factors associated with access to dental services of community-dwelling adults with physical disabilities in Thailand.METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at the Center of Independent Living, community club for individuals with disabilities in Pathum Thani province, Thailand, in February 2018. Individual participants were interviewed by a trained interviewer using a structured questionnaire that consisted of (1) questions on demographic characteristics and (2) adapted questions that were based on the modified Penchansky and Thomas’s dimensions of access (accessibility, availability, acceptability, affordability, accommodation and awareness). Enter method of binary logistic regression analysis was used.RESULTS: We included 198 individuals with physical disabilities. Most participants had not attended dental care services in the previous 12 months (77.3%) and gave negative responses for all questions regarding the dimensions of access. Although we did not observe any statistically significant differences in age and the six dimensions of access between participants who had attended at least one dental appointment and those who had not, in multivariate analysis, we found a statistically significant association indicated that participants who had education < primary were 3.35 times more likely to had not attended at least one dental appointment (p = 0.002).CONCLUSION: Our findings have uncovered factors associated with access to dental services of community-dwelling adults with physical disabilities in Thailand. Individuals with physical disabilities are in need of oral health education programs regarding proper oral health behaviors such as regular dental services attendance, appropriate oral hygiene practices and dental care benefits.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".