Oral Health Literacy in Migrant and Ethnic Minority Populations: A Systematic Review

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.

Abstract

Cultural background influences how migrants and ethnic minority populations view and assess health. Poor oral health literacy (OHL) may be a hindrance in achieving good oral health. This systematic review summarizes the current quantitative evidence regarding OHL of migrants and ethnic minority populations. The PubMed database was searched for original quantitative studies that explore OHL as a holistic multidimensional construct or at least one of its subdimensions in migrants and ethnic minority populations. 34 publications were selected. Only 2 studies specifically addressed OHL in migrant populations. Generally, participants without migration background had higher OHL than migrant and ethnic minority populations. The latter showed lower dental service utilization, negative oral health beliefs, negative oral health behavior, and low levels of oral health knowledge. Due to its potential influence on OHL, oral health promoting behavior, attitudes, capabilities, and beliefs as well as the cultural and ethnic background of persons should be considered in medical education and oral health prevention programs.

Related collections

Most cited references 70

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Periodontal diseases

Bruce Pihlstrom, Bryan Michalowicz, Newell W. Johnson (2005)

The Lancet, 366(9499), 1809-1820

0 comments Cited 492 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis.

Alison Cooke, Debbie Smith, Alison Cooke (2013)

Standardized systematic search strategies facilitate rigor in research. Current search tools focus on retrieval of quantitative research. In this article we address issues relating to using existing search strategy tools, most typically the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) formulation for defining key elements of a review question, when searching for qualitative and mixed methods research studies. An alternative search strategy tool for qualitative/mixed methods research is outlined: SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type). We used both the SPIDER and PICO search strategy tools with a qualitative research question. We have used the SPIDER tool to advance thinking beyond PICO in its suitable application to qualitative and mixed methods research. However, we have highlighted once more the need for improved indexing of qualitative articles in databases. To constitute a viable alternative to PICO, SPIDER needs to be refined and tested on a wider range of topics.

0 comments Cited 444 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias

Kerry Dwan, Douglas G. Altman, Juan A. Arnaiz … (2008)

Background The increased use of meta-analysis in systematic reviews of healthcare interventions has highlighted several types of bias that can arise during the completion of a randomised controlled trial. Study publication bias has been recognised as a potential threat to the validity of meta-analysis and can make the readily available evidence unreliable for decision making. Until recently, outcome reporting bias has received less attention. Methodology/Principal Findings We review and summarise the evidence from a series of cohort studies that have assessed study publication bias and outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials. Sixteen studies were eligible of which only two followed the cohort all the way through from protocol approval to information regarding publication of outcomes. Eleven of the studies investigated study publication bias and five investigated outcome reporting bias. Three studies have found that statistically significant outcomes had a higher odds of being fully reported compared to non-significant outcomes (range of odds ratios: 2.2 to 4.7). In comparing trial publications to protocols, we found that 40–62% of studies had at least one primary outcome that was changed, introduced, or omitted. We decided not to undertake meta-analysis due to the differences between studies. Conclusions Recent work provides direct empirical evidence for the existence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. There is strong evidence of an association between significant results and publication; studies that report positive or significant results are more likely to be published and outcomes that are statistically significant have higher odds of being fully reported. Publications have been found to be inconsistent with their protocols. Researchers need to be aware of the problems of both types of bias and efforts should be concentrated on improving the reporting of trials.

0 comments Cited 437 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

C. Kofahl:

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0503-3077

kofahl@uke.de

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Immigr Minor Health

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): J Immigr Minor Health

Title: Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health

Publisher: Springer US (New York )

ISSN (Print): 1557-1912

ISSN (Electronic): 1557-1920

Publication date (Electronic): 27 August 2021

Publication date PMC-release: 27 August 2021

Publication date (Print): 2022

Volume: 24

Issue: 4

Pages: 1061-1080

Affiliations

[1 ]GRID grid.13648.38, ISNI 0000 0001 2180 3484, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, ; Hamburg, Germany

[2 ]GRID grid.13648.38, ISNI 0000 0001 2180 3484, Institute of Medical Sociology, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, ; Hamburg, Germany

[3 ]GRID grid.13648.38, ISNI 0000 0001 2180 3484, Department of Periodontics, Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, ; Hamburg, Germany

Author information

C. Kofahl http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0503-3077

Article

Publisher ID: 1266

DOI: 10.1007/s10903-021-01266-9

PMC ID: 9256555

PubMed ID: 34448993

SO-VID: a7f5a361-786a-4675-b71b-95b9e7654a5d

License:

Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

History

Date accepted : 18 August 2021

Funding

Funded by: Innovation Fund of the Joint Federal Committee (G-BA)

Award ID: 01VSF17051

Award Recipient : G. Aarabi

Funded by: Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) (5411)

Open Access :

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

Custom metadata

ScienceOpen disciplines: Health & Social care

Keywords: oral health literacy,dental service utilization,oral health beliefs,oral health behaviors,oral health knowledge,migrants,ethnic minorities

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Health & Social care

Keywords: oral health literacy, dental service utilization, oral health beliefs, oral health behaviors, oral health knowledge, migrants, ethnic minorities

Oral Health Literacy in Migrant and Ethnic Minority Populations: A Systematic Review

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Tobacco Prevention & Cessation

Most cited references 70

Periodontal diseases

Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis.

Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author information

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 294

Cited by 8

Most referenced authors 1,231