MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388733406 · doi:10.1177/23800844231206359

A Scoping Review of Oral Health Outcomes and Oral Health Service Utilization of 2SLGBTQ+ People

2023· review· en· W4388733406 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJDR Clinical & Translational Research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgenderMedicineHealth careLesbianGerontologyPopulationQuality of life (healthcare)Scope (computer science)Oral healthHealth equityReproductive healthFamily medicineEnvironmental healthNursingPsychologyPublic healthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Oral health is an integral aspect of overall well-being and quality of life. Population groups such as two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer, including other sexual and gender minorities (2SLGBTQ+), have reported poor oral health outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this review was to investigate the extent and scope of the literature describing 2SLGBTQ+ oral health outcomes, including unmet oral health needs and patterns of oral health care service utilization, as well as the risk factors affecting both. METHODS: A comprehensive search strategy was developed to review the scope of the literature pertinent to unmet oral health needs and factors affecting access to oral health care among 2SLGBTQ+ members, globally. In total, 6 databases were searched with a combination of keywords relevant to 2SLGBTQ+ oral health status and oral health care utilization. RESULTS: Our review identified 10 studies that met the eligibility criteria. Five out of 10 studies were based in India, 4 in the United States, and 1 in Brazil. Two studies reported poorer oral health outcomes among transgender people as compared with cisgender people, while 2 studies reported similar patterns of dental service utilization between their transgender and cisgender participants. Five studies explored the personal and structural risk factors associated with poor oral health outcomes, including financial affordability and income level and perceived discrimination, including instances of misgendering in health care settings. However, further comprehensive studies must be conducted to validate the trends and findings reported by the studies in the review and to generate data from diverse regional contexts. CONCLUSIONS: Our review identified that the extent of the literature in this research area is sparse and scarce. The evidence indicates poorer oral health status among 2SLGBTQ+ communities. Wider studies with diverse, representative samples are required to gain a comprehensive understanding of 2SLGBTQ+ oral health outcomes. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: The results of this review will undoubtedly be important for many years to come as 2SLGBTQ+ oral health equity is prioritized by experts in public health dentistry. This review will allow other researchers to understand and fill literature gaps regarding 2SLGBTQ+ oral health outcomes, furthering this area of research.

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.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.853
GPT teacher head0.750
Teacher spread0.103 · 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