Les perceptions et les besoins en santé dentaire chez des femmes francophones en situation minoritaire vivant dans un contexte de vulnérabilité sociale à Ottawa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Se basant sur un engagement bénévole prolongé dans une halte-accueil à Ottawa, l’étude examine les perceptions et les besoins en santé dentaire chez les clientes du centre, femmes francophones en situation minoritaire qui vivent dans un contexte particulier de vulnérabilité sociale. Deux méthodes de recherche ont été utilisées dans une approche participative: des entrevues semi-dirigées (n=7) et des ateliers de discussion en groupe (n=5) utilisant des moyens d’expression littéraires et artistiques. Les participantes font face à différentes barrières à l’accès aux soins dentaires: financières, structurales, émotionnelles, communicationnelles et relationnelles. Ces difficultés majeures interagissent de manière complexe et dynamique et affectent la santé dentaire, mentale et physique. Les résultats avancent la nécessité d’une offre active de communication, des services en français centrés sur le patient, prenant en considération les conséquences de l’abus, ainsi qu’une prise en charge universelle et interdisciplinaire de la santé dentaire dans un cadre communautaire. Relying on a five month volunteering commitment at an Ottawa drop-in, this study explores dental perceptions and needs among clients of the centre, francophone minority women living in a context of social vulnerability. In a participatory inquiry approach, two research methods were used: semi-structured interviews (n=7) and group discussion workshops using literary and artistic means of expression (n=5). The results show that participants face major access barriers to dental care: financial, structural, emotional, communicational and relational. Those major difficulties interact as a complex and dynamic web affecting dental, mental and physical health. The study argues for an active offer of communication, as well as a supply of patient centered services, offered in French, and accounting for the consequences of sexual and verbal abuse, all within the context of a community-based, universal and interdisciplinary provision of dental care.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".