ArticlePeerJ2022
Association between clinical oral health status and perceived oral health in different age groups.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of treatment needs, barriers, and self-perception regarding oral health among female university students: a cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Self-perceived oral health among Brazilian university students: a cross-sectional study.Brazilian oral research · 2024Article
- Oral Health Status of Outpatients with Schizophrenia in Ankara, Türkiye: A Descriptive Study.Turk psikiyatri dergisi = Turkish journal of psychiatry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The perceived oral health refers to the very own perception of a person's oral health (OH). This study aims to explore the association of perceived oral health status (PSR-OHS) with clinically determined OHS in three age groups: young adults, adults and older adults. This study also aims to identify demographic, socio-economic and/or clinical factors that influence PSR-OHS. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in ten different dental hospitals of Pakistan. The one-way ANOVA test was used to analyze patient's demographic distribution with PSR-OHS and oral functions. The complex sample general linear model was used to determine association between clinical OH and PSR-OHS. Analyses of each age group were conducted separately. Results: A total of 1,804 outdoor patients participated in the study, out of which 660 were young adults, 685 adults and 459 were older adults. Overall self-perception of all age groups about their oral health was 'good' (mean = 3.71). Female gender and education status were a significant factor in young adults and adults. Family income affected PSR-OHS of only the adult age group. Frequent visit to dental clinic and preventive reason of dental attendance were associated with good PSR-OHS. DMFT score, prosthesis score and periodontal score also affected the PSR-OHS of individuals. Association between PSR-OHS and clinical examination was confirmed by complex general linear model. Conclusion: There are differences in the perceived oral health status of young adults, adults and older adults. The variables, age, education, family income, DMFT score, prosthesis score and periodontal score directly influence the self-perception of individuals.
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.