Orthodontists' perceptions of and adaptations to nonspecialist and direct-to-consumer orthodontic service providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate orthodontists' perceived impacts on their practices as a result of general practitioners (GPs) and direct-to-consumer (DTC) orthodontic care providers and the adaptational changes implemented in the past 10 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic survey was administered to 270 orthodontists in Canada and the United States to determine demographic background, perception of perceived impact, and specific changes implemented to improve practice competitiveness. RESULTS: More experienced orthodontists (P = .0001) and males (P = .027) were more likely to indicate a perceived impact from GP orthodontics. American orthodontists were significantly more likely than Canadian orthodontists to perceive an impact from DTC providers (P = .017). There was a positive association with orthodontists' years of experience and having implemented adaptational changes to their practice for a period greater than 10 years across multiple categories. Female orthodontists were more likely to have implemented adaptational changes for a period of less than 10 years across multiple categories. CONCLUSIONS: The perceived impact of GPs providing orthodontic care was greater than that of DTC providers. American orthodontists were significantly more likely to perceive an impact from DTC providers. Orthodontists have experienced a reduction in referrals from GPs and an increase in referred case difficulty. Less experienced and female orthodontists have made the most adaptive changes to their practices in the past 10 years.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".