Identification and assessment of factors that impact the demand for and supply of dental hygienists amidst an evolving workforce context: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study involved a scoping review to explore factors influencing dental hygienist demand and supply in high-income countries. METHODS: A six-stage scoping review was conducted with separate search strategies tailored to four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and Google) plus a targeted scan of dental hygienist organization websites. This yielded 2,117 unique citations, leading to 148 articles included in the review. RESULTS: Nearly half of the articles (47%) focused on the United States, with 11% on Canada. Most articles (91%) were in English, alongside 13 in Korean and one in French. Journal articles comprised 62% of the publications, followed by reports/working papers (11%) and websites (11%). Other types included conference abstracts, policy briefs, and presentation slides. Content-wise, 47% were original research, with analysis articles (14%), commentaries (11%), and reviews (8%) also present. The articles were coded into three main categories: workforce characteristics/projections, factor-specific analyses, and workforce opportunities. The articles on workforce characteristics covered demographic, geographic, and employment aspects of dental hygienists, along with projections for supply and demand using simulation modelling and geospatial analyses. Factor-specific articles investigated the (1) working environment, (2) policy/regulatory/training environment, (3) job/career satisfaction and related human resource issues, and (4) scope of practice. The third key category of articles highlighted opportunities for expanding the workforce through alternative models in different sectors/settings (e.g., public health, primary care, long-term care, hospitals, mobile outreach, and non-clinical roles including research, education and leadership) and for a range of vulnerable or underserved populations (e.g., geriatric and pediatric populations, persons with disabilities, those living in rural/remote areas, Indigenous peoples, and incarcerated people). CONCLUSIONS: This review provides a comprehensive documentation of the current state of the dental hygienist workforce, compiling factors affecting demand and supply, and highlighting opportunities for the dental hygienist workforce in Canada and other high-income countries. The findings offer a foundation for future research, highlighting the need for more focused and rigorous reviews and underscoring the necessity of high-quality studies to verify the effectiveness of various interventions and policies. This is crucial to address dental hygienist workforce challenges and ensure the sustainability and effectiveness of oral health care delivery.
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 | 0.048 | 0.150 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.027 | 0.026 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".