MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392912472 · doi:10.3390/jcm13061736

Oral Findings in Male Prisoners: A Systematic Review

2024· review· en· W4392912472 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rafał Korkosz, Agata Trzcionka, Tomasz Hildebrandt, Maksymilian Kiełbratowski, Anna Kuśka-Kiełbratowska, Mansur Rahnama, Marta Tanasiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOral hygieneFamily medicineScopusPopulationOral healthDentistryMEDLINEEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Modern penitentiary systems attach great importance, at least in the area of formal and codified arrangements, to providing inmates with access to health care and rehabilitation. The aim of our study was to analyze the Web of Science (WoS) and SCOPUS medical databases in order to search for and evaluate the available literature discussing the oral status and dental treatment needs of adult male prisoners. Methods: The following terms were used: prisoners or inmates; oral health, oral status; periodontal status, periodontal disease; oral hygiene; caries; mucosa; and saliva. The studies were screened based on their title and abstract according to the PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcome) criteria. The research protocol was prepared on the basis of the 2020 PRISMA guidelines and was not registered. The available literature discussing the oral status and dental treatment needs of adult imprisoned patients was analyzed. The inclusion criteria were as follows: articles published in English between 1 January 2012 and 2022; articles discussing the oral cavity status of adult inmates over 18 years old (hard tissues, periodontal status, saliva, mucosa condition, or oral hygiene); articles with a full text available; and articles that were assessed as satisfactory according to the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: A total of 934 articles were identified, out of which 9 were included in the systematic review. Two articles discussed the oral condition of prisoners in Europe (Russia and Finland), four examined prisoners in Asia (three in India and one in Saudi Arabia), two examined prisoners in Africa (Nigeria), and one examined prisoners in the Americas (Brazil). Conclusions: The oral status of prisoners has been widely discussed in the available literature. Among inmates, a higher frequency of both caries and periodontal disease along with poorer oral hygiene were observed. It can be concluded that inmates should have access to specialized treatment from periodontists and endodontists.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.006
Bibliometrics0.0160.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207