Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
49
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      London Charter on Oral Health Inequalities

      1 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 4
      Journal of Dental Research
      SAGE Publications

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Social conditions as fundamental causes of health inequalities: theory, evidence, and policy implications.

          Link and Phelan (1995) developed the theory of fundamental causes to explain why the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and mortality has persisted despite radical changes in the diseases and risk factors that are presumed to explain it. They proposed that the enduring association results because SES embodies an array of resources, such as money, knowledge, prestige, power, and beneficial social connections that protect health no matter what mechanisms are relevant at any given time. In this article, we explicate the theory, review key findings, discuss refinements and limits to the theory, and discuss implications for health policies that might reduce health inequalities. We advocate policies that encourage medical and other health-promoting advances while at the same time breaking or weakening the link between these advances and socioeconomic resources. This can be accomplished either by reducing disparities in socioeconomic resources themselves or by developing interventions that, by their nature, are more equally distributed across SES groups.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Global burden of oral conditions in 1990-2010: a systematic analysis.

            The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 Study produced comparable estimates of the burden of 291 diseases and injuries in 1990, 2005, and 2010. This article reports on the global burden of untreated caries, severe periodontitis, and severe tooth loss in 2010 and compares those figures with new estimates for 1990. We used disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) and years lived with disability (YLDs) metrics to quantify burden. Oral conditions affected 3.9 billion people, and untreated caries in permanent teeth was the most prevalent condition evaluated for the entire GBD 2010 Study (global prevalence of 35% for all ages combined). Oral conditions combined accounted for 15 million DALYs globally (1.9% of all YLDs; 0.6% of all DALYs), implying an average health loss of 224 years per 100,000 population. DALYs due to oral conditions increased 20.8% between 1990 and 2010, mainly due to population growth and aging. While DALYs due to severe periodontitis and untreated caries increased, those due to severe tooth loss decreased. DALYs differed by age groups and regions, but not by genders. The findings highlight the challenge in responding to the diversity of urgent oral health needs worldwide, particularly in developing communities.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Socioeconomic inequality and caries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

              Dental caries is the most prevalent disease worldwide, with the majority of caries lesions being concentrated in few, often disadvantaged social groups. We aimed to systematically assess current evidence for the association between socioeconomic position (SEP) and caries. We included studies investigating the association between social position (determined by own or parental educational or occupational background, or income) and caries prevalence, experience, or incidence. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Reported differences between the lowest and highest SEP were assessed and data not missing at random imputed. Random-effects inverse-generic meta-analyses were performed, and subgroup and meta-regression analyses were used to control for possible confounding. Publication bias was assessed via funnel plot analysis and the Egger test. From 5539 screened records, 155 studies with mostly low or moderate quality evaluating a total of 329,798 individuals were included. Studies used various designs, SEP measures, and outcome parameters. Eighty-three studies found at least one measure of caries to be significantly higher in low-SEP compared with high-SEP individuals, while only 3 studies found the opposite. The odds of having any caries lesions or caries experience (decayed missing filled teeth [DMFT]/dmft > 0) were significantly greater in those with low own or parental educational or occupational background or income (between odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.21 [1.03-1.41] and 1.48 [1.34-1.63]. The association between low educational background and having DMFT/dmft > 0 was significantly increased in highly developed countries (R (2) = 1.32 [0.53-2.13]. Publication bias was present but did not significantly affect our estimates. Due to risk of bias in included studies, the available evidence was graded as low or very low. Low SEP is associated with a higher risk of having caries lesions or experience. This association might be stronger in developed countries. Established diagnostic and treatment concepts might not account for the unequal distribution of caries (registered with PROSPERO [CRD42013005947]).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Dental Research
                J Dent Res
                SAGE Publications
                0022-0345
                1544-0591
                March 2016
                December 23 2015
                March 2016
                : 95
                : 3
                : 245-247
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Research Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
                [2 ]Translational Health Economics Group, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
                [3 ]Munich Center for the Economics of Aging, Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy, Munich, Germany
                [4 ]Australian Research Centre for Population Oral Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
                Article
                10.1177/0022034515622198
                26701349
                6ac42690-3e17-41e5-922c-d20ac30ebebc
                © 2016

                http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content4,290

                Cited by32

                Most referenced authors147