Is the oral health reform in Israel optimally distributed? - A commentary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A traditional and ethical principle recognizes a country's primary general welfare responsibility to the young and the old. However, the middle, adult, age group cannot and should not be disregarded. The current dental component of the National Health Insurance Law (NHIL), in Israel, only includes children and the elderly. The present commentary focuses on the large group of adults, age 19-74, which are currently excluded.The cumulative incidence of disease increases over the lifetime of a person. We believe that a NHIL commitment with a major age gap in coverage is unacceptable. The recent manuscript, published by Natapov et al., in this journal, has documented the overall dental health of the older Israeli population, with emphasis on nutritional aspects. This contribution to the literature is commendable. However, we aim to follow in the steps of the Alma Ata Declaration and Ottawa Charter of the World Health Organization (WHO) and to clarify that the government's responsibility should cover all residents regardless of their age. In addition, a dental health epidemiological data base, currently nonexistent for adults, is called for.
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 | 0.012 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.073 | 0.037 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".