An Integrative Literature Review on The Oral Health Sector of Korea National Health Promotion Plan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The establishment of a strategy for the reduction and prevention of oral disease, a global pervasive disease, is considered one of the important national health policy strategies.In Korea, the 5th Comprehensive National Health Promotion Plan is currently in progress, but there is insufficient research on the transition process or improvement direction in the field of oral health.Methods: Changes in Comprehensive National Health Promotion Plan's Oral health sector in three countries were compared, and the direction of the three countries (Korea, the United States, and Canada) in accordance with the recent Oral health paradigm was confirmed.In this study, we reviewed the existing literature using the narrative review method to draw implications for strategies and directions for oral health promotion in Korea.Results: In Korea, the oral health promotion strategy is included in the 5th Comprehensive National Health Promotion Plan, and the project is being led by the government.The United States prepared a national-led oral health promotion strategy and suggested multi-disciplinary cooperation to improve overall oral health and reduce the oral health inequality.For more active intervention, Canada established an oral health-related department and assigned experts, while emphasizing cooperation between the government and the private sector.Conclusion: As a result of this study, Korea is also making efforts to improve oral health, but more active government intervention is needed to reduce the inequality in oral health by population group.To this end, it is necessary to establish a strong multi-sectoral cooperation system and prepare a strategy for implementation.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".