MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401041439

Long-Term Trends in Access to Dental Care in Canada.

2024· article· en· W4401041439 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Grootendorst, Thi Hong Hai Nguyen, Carlos Quiñonez

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerm (time)Dental careMedicineDentistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Although routine dental care is essential for both oral and overall health, in Canada, access to such care is uneven. Those with low or medium income and no workplace dental coverage often face financial barriers in accessing dental care. However, the factors that affect access - income, employer-provided health benefits and public dental care subsidy programs - have changed over the decades. This study examines the net impact of these factors on long-term trends in dental care access among different groups in Canada over the past 5 decades. METHODS: Using data from 1 235 268 respondents to 20 Canadian cross-sectional surveys administered between 1972 and 2017, we estimated the proportion of people who had at least 1 consult with a dental professional over the past 12 months. Prevalence trends by region, age group, education and income level were compared. RESULTS: In each age group, the proportion of people consulting a dental professional at least annually gradually increased over the last 5 decades. During the recession of the early 1990s, a temporary drop in use occurred, particularly among younger age groups. We noted significant regional differences in use among individuals in the same age group: rates were highest in Ontario and British Columbia and lowest in Quebec and the Atlantic provinces. Marked differences in use by level of education and income persisted over the 5 decades. Dental care use was significantly higher among those with higher levels of education and higher incomes. The increase in overall rates of dental care use suggest that an increasing fraction of Canadians have higher incomes or are better educated, or both. Nevertheless, about a third of Canadians ≥ 15 years did not receive dental care in 2015. CONCLUSIONS: Given that dental care is almost wholly privately funded and displays a high degree of income-related inequity, there is an urgent need for policy action to address unequal access to dental care in Canada.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicDental Health and Care Utilization→French-language works237,207→