MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099729078

Grootendorst P: Dental insurance, income and the use of dental care in Canada

2015· article· en· W7099729078 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusDental careDental insuranceDental healthOral healthHealth careSocial class
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using recent Canadian health survey data, we investigated the effect of socioeconomic status on patients ’ use of dental services and dental insurance coverage. Our results point to an important socioeconomic gradient in the use of dental services. The prob-ability of receiving any dental care over the course of a year increases markedly with dental insurance, household income, and level of education. Among those receiving at least some dental care, however, a person’s general oral health — not fi nancial factors — largely determined visit frequency. The insurance effect appears to operate through a reduction in price paid at point of service, not decisions by those with high anticipated need for dental care to selectively purchase insurance. Indeed, those with poorer self-assessed oral health, as well as those from Quebec (where dental benefi ts are subject to personal income tax) and those over 65 years of age (who have likely lost employer-provided coverage) were less likely to be insured. MeSH Key Words: dental care/economic; health services needs & demand; health services research; insurance, dental

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207