MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084126361 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.8025919

Understanding the complexities of oral healthcare delivery in correctional settings: a qualitative exploration of barriers, facilitators, and opportunities

2025· other· en· W7084126361 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDown syndrome and intellectual disability research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisonThematic analysisOral healthQualitative researchHealth careQuality (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background People living in prison face exceptionally high prevalence rates of tooth decay, periodontal disease, and poor oral health-related quality of life. Despite its importance, various aspects of oral healthcare in prison settings remain understudied. The present study investigates the barriers and facilitators associated with providing and utilizing oral health services in prison settings, drawing on insights from prison health experts, managerial and custodial staff, healthcare providers, and individuals with lived experience of imprisonment. Methods From March to June 2023, a total of fifteen participants participated in semi-structured in-depth interviews. Interviews were conducted until data saturation to identify barriers and facilitators of oral health services in prisons. Potential areas for improvement were also explored. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. Themes and sub-themes were derived from the dataset and converted into preliminary codes which aligned with research objectives. Results The first topic, barriers, included two themes: organizational barriers related to the provision of services, and individual barriers related to the utilization of services. The second topic, facilitating factors, included six themes: funding, community partnership, substance use treatment, communicating with policy makers, transportation, and education. Conclusion Ensuring the oral health of incarcerated individuals is a fundamental aspect of their right to health and a crucial factor in their successful reintegration into society. Formerly incarcerated people are often hard to reach in the community, making the period of confinement a unique opportunity to deliver quality oral healthcare. Given that most incarcerated individuals will eventually return to their communities, providing comprehensive healthcare, including oral health interventions, represents a valuable public health investment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.494
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.072 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueFigshareSame topicDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchFrench-language works237,207