MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173568617 · doi:10.1016/j.hpopen.2021.100042

Oral health guidelines in the primary care policies of five selected countries: An integrative review

2021· review· en· W3173568617 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Policy OPEN · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsHealth promotionHealth careGrey literatureMedicineHealth policyPromotion (chess)NursingHealth educationPublic healthEnvironmental healthEconomic growthPolitical scienceMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Oral conditions remain a major health problem worldwide. Primary Health Care (PHC) has been recognized as a strategy to construct integrated health systems in order to produce the best health outcomes and reduce inequities through its attributes. Nevertheless, oral health integration in PHC remains unclear due to a lack of systematic knowledge. Aim: To summarize oral health guidelines focused on the comprehensiveness component of PHC in the health system and on the intersectoral component of health promotion and disease prevention actions in five selected countries. Methods: An integrative review of scientific and grey literature was led. Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom and Brazil were selected. Content analysis was performed based on the comprehensiveness of care and health promotion and disease prevention categories. Results: Forty-one studies were selected to compose the review. Regarding the comprehensiveness of care, the horizontal dimension was more prominent, suggesting that oral care should be provided in cooperation with other health areas. Health promotion and disease prevention actions in intersectoral contexts are complex but seem to be effective. Programs for spreading access to fluorides and actions with the education sector are the most established ones. Conclusion: The integration of oral health in PHC policies is recommended in the guidelines of all countries, however, it stills represents a major challenge for the health care systems. These guidelines represent an important source to support decision-makers, policy-makers and stakeholders.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.396 · 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