MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6962428255 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/pdnem

Strategies to Promote Oral Health Equity for Immigrant Populations in Canada and the USA: A Scoping Review Protocol.

2025· article· en· W6962428255 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLibraries and Information Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationEquity (law)Health equityOral healthSocioeconomic statusRefugeePsychological interventionProtocol (science)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this scoping review protocol is to map the existing evidence on strategies and interventions that improve oral health equity in immigrant populations in Canada and the USA. Immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers and non-permanent residents face various challenges in accessing dental care, including socioeconomic factors, language differences, culture clashes and systemic inequalities. The purpose of this scoping review is to ascertain the types of barriers, facilitators and evidence-based initiatives that lead to good oral health outcomes for newcomers in North America. This protocol will follow JBI methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines and will provide guidance for future research and policy on management of oral health in newcomers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkSame topicLibraries and Information ServicesFrench-language works237,207