Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32911694›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Oral Health Inequalities and the Corporate Determinants of Health: A Commentary.

Lisa Jamieson, Barry Gibson, W Murray Thomson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A Systematic Review of Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of Oral Health Literacy Tools.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lisa JamiesonAustralian Research Centre for Population Oral Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia.
Barry GibsonSchool of Dentistry, University of Sheffield, Broomhall, Sheffield S10 2TG, UK.
W Murray ThomsonSchool of Dentistry, University of Otago, North Dunedin, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-0588-6843

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Empirical research critically examining the role of the corporate determinants of health has gained traction in the past few years. Many of these reports have received strong, sometimes litigious, backlash from the corporations exposed. The aim of this paper is to provide a critical commentary on existing literature, policies, procedures and observations of issues, especially regarding the use of the corporate determinants of health as a research construct, in the persistence and flourishing of oral health inequalities at a global level. We discuss theoretical frameworks that underpin the power constructs of the corporate determinants of health, including Lukes "three faces of power" theory. This theory posits that power is exercised in three ways: through decision-making, through non-decision-making and ideologically. We will demonstrate, using examples of corporate determinants of health and oral health inequalities from several countries, how intervening at key leverage points is a crucial strategy for improving oral health inequalities at a global level.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesOral HealthHumansOrganizationsSocioeconomic Factorscorporate determinants of healthinternational oral health inequalitiesLukes “three faces of power” theory

Identifiers

PMID32911694
PMCPMC7559480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.