The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the experiences of Nova Scotian dentists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted how healthcare practitioners operate and provide care. Dentists are at an increasing risk of contracting the disease; working in mouths and constantly exposed to patient respiratory droplets and aerosols.ObjectiveWe explored the experiences of Nova Scotian dentists including motivation to work and perceived organizational support during a global public health crisis.MethodsThis was a mixed-methods study utilizing a sequential exploratory design. Phase 1 involved qualitative interviews with eight Nova Scotian dentists regarding their pandemic experiences. In Phase 2, a cross-sectional survey informed by Phase 1 focused on motivation to work and perceived organizational support. Descriptive statistics summarized the study sample, while Chi-square and t-tests explored associations and differences between subgroups.ResultsPhase 1 revealed logistical and physical challenges, including difficulty obtaining and working in personal protective equipment. Barriers to motivation included financial stresses and concern about patients without care. A key recommendation was against complete practice shut down in future pandemics. Clear return to work plans provided by the Nova Scotia Dental Association (NSDA) were identified as important support. Phase 2 revealed a high level of perceived organizational and regulatory body support among respondents (n = 19). Men exhibited slightly higher intrinsic motivation compared to women. Changes in patient needs included clenching and grinding, (the "Covid clench"), as top observations by dentists.ConclusionsThis study's insights into dentists' occupational challenges suggest that regulatory guidelines helped streamline return-to-work, and future improvements in crisis preparedness and business management would be beneficial.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".