MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892760825 · doi:10.21815/jde.018.104

Mind the Gap: A Systematic Review of Implementation of Screening for Psychological Comorbidity in Dental and Dental Hygiene Education

2018· review· en· W2892760825 on OpenAlexaff
Birgitta Häggman‐Henrikson, EwaCarin Ekberg, Dominik A. Ettlin, Ambra Michelotti, Justin Durham, Jean‐Paul Goulet, Corine M. Visscher, Karen G. Raphael

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dental Education · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsBiopsychosocial modelPsycINFOPsychosocialMedicineMEDLINEAnxietyComorbidityFamily medicinePsychiatryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biopsychosocial model is advocated as part of a more comprehensive approach in both medicine and dentistry. However, dentists have not traditionally been taught psychosocial screening as part of their predoctoral education. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of published studies on the implementation of screening for psychological comorbidity in dental and dental hygiene education. The term "psychological comorbidity" refers to the degree of coexisting anxiety, depression, or other mental health problems in a patient presenting with a physical condition. The review followed a protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016054083) and was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using a ten-item tool developed for medical education. The electronic search in PubMed, Scopus, and PsycINFO from the inception of each database until December 31, 2016, together with a hand search, identified 1,777 articles. After abstracts were screened, 52 articles were reviewed in full text applying inclusion and exclusion criteria; four articles remained for the qualitative synthesis. Generally, the reported data on specific methods or instruments used for psychological screening were limited. Only one of the included articles utilized a validated screening tool. The results of this systematic review show that published data on the implementation of psychological patient assessment in dental and dental hygiene education are limited. To address this gap, the authors recommend short screening tools such as the Graded Chronic Pain Scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety. Educating dental and dental hygiene students about easy-to-use, reliable, and validated screening tools for assessing psychological comorbidity warrants more research attention and greater implementation in educational curricula.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.009
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.214
GPT teacher head0.594
Teacher spread0.380 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dental EducationSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207