Evaluation de la douleur et de l’anxiété lors de soins dentaires chez les patients hospitalisés en psychiatrie: Evaluating pain and anxiety under dental care in psychiatric inpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectif: La santé bucco-dentaire des patients en psychiatrie est problématique, puisque le recours au chirurgien-dentiste demeure inférieur de 25 % à la population générale. En partant de ce postulat, nous avons souhaité comprendre en quoi l’anxiété et la douleur du patient peuvent impacter la prise en charge bucco-dentaire et le bon déroulement des soins. Méthode: Cette étude a été menée sur 100 patients hospitalisés en psychiatrie. Grâce à différentes échelles, nous avons évalué leur niveau d’anxiété et de douleur, mais aussi leur coopération aux soins. Résultats: L’anxiété ne constitue pas un frein à la prise en charge, et diminue significativement après les soins. Le comportement durant les soins bucco-dentaires des patients hospitalisés en psychiatrie semble similaire à celui de la population générale. Conclusion: Notre étude permet de mieux appréhender les soins dentaires en psychiatrie et devrait contribuer à placer les soins dentaires au centre de la prise en charge somatique en psychiatrie.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".