Improving Access to Necessary Oral Healthcare Among Racialized Women Impacted by Intimate Partner Violence: A Qualitative Exploration of Care Seeking Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Women with lived experiences of intimate partner violence (IPV), especially physical trauma to the head, neck, and face, can experience oral health issues, leading to significant dental problems. Despite these severe dental outcomes, racialized women who have experienced IPV often find oral healthcare largely inaccessible. Yet access to oral care is a crucial, overlooked aspect of health and support for racialized women who have experienced IPV. The study aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators to accessing oral healthcare for racialized women who experience intimate partner violence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative research study using a critical, intersectional lens and principles of Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) was conducted using 14 interviews with women and five focus group discussions with dentists (n = 9) and shelter providers (n = 8) in Toronto, Canada. The resulting data were analyzed through reflexive thematic analysis guided by the McIntyre access framework. RESULTS: The research findings highlighted multiple barriers to oral healthcare. Financial difficulties and coverage restrictions make it challenging for participants to afford the high cost of needed treatment. There are intersectional power dynamics and structural barriers in service delivery that shape oral care experiences and can manifest as racial discrimination and misogyny. Additional barriers include long waitlists and minimal access to culturally responsive care. CONCLUSIONS: This research underscores the urgent need for policies that expand dental care coverage and for further training of dental providers in trauma sensitivity and culturally competent care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".