MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Saturdays Orthodontic Appointments, Demand, and Patients\' Commitment

2023· article· en· W4319350223 on OpenAlexaff
Sawsan Tabbaa, Shankargouda Patil, Tarek El‐Bialy, Justin McDaniel, Youssef Toubouti, Rehana Bashir

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Education, Practice, Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Logistic regressionMedicineFamily medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: The purpose of this study was to determine the demand for orthodontic appointments on weekends and the level of commitment the patients have for those appointments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey of 17 questions was created and given to 199 adult patients. The first six questions addressed demographic information, followed by three questions addressing whether coming to their orthodontic appointments required taking time off of work. The remaining questions asked if they would prefer to attend orthodontic appointments on Saturday if they would take advantage of a Saturday appointment, and what their preferred time and level of commitment would be for this appointment. The data were analyzed using the logistic-regression Chi-square test. RESULTS: About 77.4% of the participants indicated that they would take advantage of appointments on Saturdays if available. The most preferred time for Saturday appointments was 7:00 am-10:00 am, followed by 10:00 am-12:00 pm. About 60.6% of the participants reported that they would be willing to sign up for AutoPay in order to be seen on Saturday. Among those who would take advantage of weekend appointments, 82.6% reported that they would likely never miss or reschedule a Saturday appointment, and 75.3% would choose an orthodontist who is open on Saturday over another orthodontist who is not. Among participants who work more than 40 hours per week, 86.1% (106) wanted to take advantage of Saturday appointments. Participants with a high household income are less inclined to take advantage of Saturday appointments compared with those with a low household income. Participants who need to take time off of work are more inclined to take advantage of Saturday appointments [93% (106) favorable vs 7% (8) unfavorable]. Participants who need to take their child out of school early for their orthodontic appointments during the week are more inclined to take advantage of Saturday appointments [87% (97) favorable vs 13% (15) unfavorable] than those who do not need to. CONCLUSION: There is a demand for Saturday orthodontic appointments with a very high commitment level among the majority of those patients. The Saturday demographic tends to be participants with a low household income who work 40 or more hours per week. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Orthodontic offices may consider working at least one Saturday per month to satisfy patient needs. They can use this survey to explore their own market for Saturday clinical practice.

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Contemporary Dental PracticeSame topicDental Education, Practice, ResearchFrench-language works237,207