The 2021 report on oral health in America: Directions for the future of dental public health and the oral health care system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the two decades between Oral Health in America: A Report of the Surgeon General and Oral Health in America: Advances and Challenges much good happened but intractable challenges persist. Inequity in oral health status, utilization, and access to care continue to negatively affect the health and economic wellbeing of Americans and their families, local, state, and federal health care systems, and American society overall. To move the nation forward, we argue that: more emphasis is needed in prevention; access to care must be improved to mitigate inequity; newer understandings of oral disease must be leveraged in the service of health and health care; the value that oral health brings to economic wellbeing must be elucidated; better policy choices must be made in all of the above; and more effective oral health care leaders in driving policy change must be trained.
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 | 0.016 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.007 |
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".