Factors influencing emergency dental care utilization among resettled Syrian refugee parents in Ontario: A cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regular dental visits are crucial for maintaining optimal oral health, yet adequate access to oral healthcare services remains a significant challenge for refugee populations, including resettled Syrian refugees in Ontario. This study aimed to assess the factors associated with visiting the dentist only for emergency care among resettled Syrian refugee parents in Ontario. A cross-sectional study of 540 Syrian refugee parents, who had resided in Ontario for an average of four years and had at least one child less than 18 years of age, was conducted from March 2021 to March 2022. Information about visiting the dentist only for emergency reasons was gathered through the question, "How often do you usually visit the dentist?" Respondents who indicated that they visit the dentist only for emergency care were categorized as "yes." Multivariable logistic regression was performed to examine the relationship between each of the sociodemographic-, migration-, and health-related factors with the primary outcome of visiting the dentist only for emergency. 73% of respondents reported visiting the dentist only for emergencies. Factors associated with emergency dental visits included dental insurance, number of children, and self-rated oral health. Individuals without dental insurance, higher number of children, and poorer self-rated oral health were more likely to seek emergency dental care. These findings highlight the barriers to regular dental visits among Syrian refugees in Ontario and underscore the need for more inclusive and accessible dental care services for such vulnerable population to enhance their oral health outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".