Salud bucal en personas con condición de discapacidad relacionada con SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19): revisión de literatura
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To describe the risk factors affecting oral health in people with disability related to SARS-CoV- 2 (COVID-19). Methods: A scoping review was performed during January 2022 in PubMed, Scielo and Google Scholar, taking articles referring to risk factors affecting people with disabling condition related to SARS-CoV 2 (COVID-19) in dentistry. The STROBE methods guide, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) tool, as well as the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) were taken into account. Articles published from December 2019 to January 2022, in English and Spanish, were selected. Results: Eight articles were found, from different databases selected for this study. Of these articles, all 8 address the topics of oral health and disability. However, only one article included disability, oral health and SARS-CoV2 (COVID-19), describing socio-familial and environmental risk factors as risk factors. Conclusions: no relationship was observed between oral health, disability and COVID-19. Only one article reported that oral health is altered by stressful situations caused by the pandemic and the lack of knowledge about oral health care of parents and guardians as responsible for them.
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 | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".