Children's Oral Health Initiative program's impact on First Nations and Inuit children.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To review data from the Children's Oral Health Initiative (COHI) database from 2006 to 2016 to determine the impact of COHI on the oral health of registered First Nations and Inuit children in Atlantic Canada (AC), Saskatchewan, and Ontario. Methods: Data from the national COHI database were analysed for children ages 0 to 7 years in participating Indigenous communities. The mean age of participants and the number of children participating in COHI, receiving a first dental screening, fluoride varnish applications, sealants, and atraumatic restorative therapy were evaluated. Participants were grouped into 3 age categories (0-2, 3-5, 6-7). The decayed, extracted, and filled primary teeth (deft) scores were calculated. Results: Between 2006 and 2016, 80,574 children with an average age of 3.8 ±2.2 years participated in COHI in Saskatchewan, Ontario, and AC. The proportion receiving oral screenings, fluoride varnish, and sealants remained consistent over time. From 2006 to 2012, the number of participants receiving atraumatic restorative therapy increased in Saskatchewan and AC, and deft scores remained relatively stable with a marginal increase observed. This finding coincided with advancing age of children in all regions. Comparison of mean deft scores for children ages 0 to 7 years between 2006-2011 and 2012-2016 revealed an increase in Ontario and Saskatchewan. In AC, there was a significant decline in mean deft scores over the 2 time periods. Conclusion: While no significant decreases in deft scores were identified, the findings suggest that children participating in COHI are receiving needed preventive services such as fluoride varnish and atraumatic restorative therapy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".