Impact of public dental care spending and insurance coverage on utilization disparities among Canadian jurisdictions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of public dental care spending and insurance coverage on dental services utilization disparities among different Canadian jurisdictions. METHODS: We utilized Canadian Institute for Health Information provincial/territorial per capita estimates for public dental care expenditure, public information on legislated dental care programs, and oral health data from the 2007-2008 Canadian Community Health Survey to make inferences regarding the relationship between dentist visits in the past 12 months and self-perceived oral health. We performed descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression analysis to determine the relationship between dentist visits and self-perceived oral health status at the provincial/territorial level and on stratified data based on three age groups - children (12-17 years), adults (18-64 years), and seniors (65 years and older). RESULTS: Overall, the presence of the "inverse care law" in dental care at the provincial/territorial level was evident. However, in the Canadian territories, which had the highest per capita public dental care expenditure, individuals with poor oral health had the highest odds of visiting a dentist compared with other jurisdictions. In jurisdictions with public dental care programs for children and/or seniors, children and seniors with poor oral health were more likely to visit dentists. CONCLUSIONS: Jurisdictions with more public spending and greater population coverage for dental care appear to better cater to those with the highest oral health care needs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".