ArticleBMJ open2019
Assessment of public oral healthcare services in Curitiba, Brazil: a cross-sectional study using the Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCATool).
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- First-contact access from the perspective of users of primary health care: an evaluation in family and oral health teams.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Changes in primary health care service experiences and urban-suburban disparities among Shanghai residents: a two-year comparative study.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- From Clinics to Communities: Understanding Public Perceptions of Dental Services in Pakistan.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Evolution of orthodontic services in the Brazilian Unified Health System: a time series analysis (2011-2022).BMC oral health · 2024Observational
- Attributes of primary health care in Mato Grosso do Sul state: PCAT-Brazil paired for users and health professionals, 2018.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare two different models of public oral health in primary care services, a so-called family health strategy (FHS), as opposed to non-FHS services designated as 'conventional' healthcare (CHC), regarding the presence and extent of the attributes of 'good' primary healthcare (PHC). The null hypothesis of this study is that the attributes do not differ between the FHS and CHC.
designCross-sectional.
settingPublic PHC services in Curitiba, the state capital of Paraná.
participantsPHC users of the public oral health network (n=900) and dentists active in this municipal network (n=203). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCATool)-Dentists and PCATool-Users were used to analyse the primary outcomes ('essential' attributes) and secondary outcomes ('derived' attributes) in the PHC.
resultsOverall, the primary care services in oral health were well evaluated, both by users and by dentists, with mean scores ascribed to PHC attributes mostly above the cut-off point (6.6). The exception for users were affiliation (6.36; 95% CI 6.11 to 6.60) and accessibility (5.83; 95% CI 5.78 to 5.89); and for dentists the accessibility (5.80; 95% CI 5.63 to 5.96). When comparing FHS and CHC, there was a superiority of the FHS model, which reached a general mean score of 7.53 (95% CI 7.48 to 7.58) among users and 7.56 (95% CI 7.45 to 7.67) among dentists; on the other hand, the CHC general mean score was of 6.61 (95% CI 6.49 to 6.73) and 6.68 (95% CI 6.56 to 6.80) respectively for users and dentists.
conclusionsThe results reveal a reasonable level of attainment of PHC attributes in the services investigated. Nevertheless, public health managers should make efforts to reduce the difficulties faced by users in accessing dental care. The more positive results achieved by FHS services indicate that the provision of oral healthcare under this strategy should be expanded.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.