MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7161983700 · doi:10.82308/35493

Étude de cohorte rétrospective portant sur l'évaluation de l'effet préventif et protecteur associe au Programme Public Scolaire de Sante Dentaire et auprès d'enfants de neuf et 12 ans de trois territoires de CLSC du Québec

2005· dissertation· en· W7161983700 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacques Véronneau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthCohortIntervention (counseling)Retrospective cohort studyPsychological interventionOral health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Quebec Preventive Dental Services Public Program (PDSPP) has a recurring annual budget of $ 12 M. Its main component is a school program (PDHPSP) having as major objective to prevent dental caries in primary school children. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the association between exposure to the PDHPSP and dental caries prevalence among Quebec children aged nine and 12 years. The main hypothesis suggested that the nine years old children found at risk for dental caries at age five and who did not benefit from any preventive intervention (the control group) will have an average d3efs + D3EFS greater by three units or more compared to that of children of the same age and caries risk but who received preventive interventions (the intervention group) in the PDHPSP. Method: a retrospective cohort design with cross-sectional data collection was used. A convenience and non-representative sample of 1185 nine years old children and 1191 12 years old was used. […]

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)0.004
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 score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDental Health and Care Utilization→French-language works237,207→