Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36441685›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

How does the dental benefits act encourage Australian families to seek and utilise oral health services?

Peivand Bastani, Reyhane Izadi, Nithin Manchery, Diep Ha, Hanny Calache, Ajesh George, Loc Do

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Peivand BastaniSchool of Dentistry, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0412-0267
Reyhane IzadiSchool of Health Management and Information Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Nithin MancherySchool of Dentistry, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Diep HaSchool of Dentistry, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Hanny CalacheLa Trobe Rural Health School, Australian Centre for Integration of Oral Health (ACIOH), La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Ajesh GeorgeAustralian Centre for Integration of Oral Health (ACIOH), School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Penrith, Australia.
Loc DoSchool of Dentistry, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
The University of Queensland · AULa Trobe University · AUShiraz University of Medical Sciences · IRThe University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to analyse the content of the Dental Benefits Act 2008 as a foundation for the Child Dental Benefits Schedule (CDBS) to determine how the Act encourages Australian families to seek and utilise oral health services.

methodsThis was a qualitative narrative document analysis conducted in 2022. Data was collected by searching formal websites for retrieving documents that reported the Australian Dental Benefits Act. The eligibility of the retrieved documents was assessed based on authenticity, credibility, representativeness, and meaningfulness of the data. A seven-steps procedure was applied for framework analysis.

resultsThe content of the Dental Benefits Act 2008 provides directions on the three categories of operational, collective, and constitutional rules. Operational rules at the level of oral health providers and the population, as the service end users, can be demonstrated as rules in use in a mutual interaction with the collective and constitutional rules. The consequence of governing the rules at the community level can easily define how the oral health services are provided and utilised. The response is sent to the government level for better regulation of oral health service delivery and utilisation. Then, with interaction and advocacy with the diverse range of stakeholders and interdisciplinary partnerships, with community groups, non-government sectors and councils, the rules can be transformed, adopted, monitored, and enforced. Another mechanism of response has occurred at the providers' and users' level and to the operational rules to community groups and stakeholders via advertising and promoting the utilisation and provision of oral health services.

conclusionThis study integrates the perspective of politicians with those of policy makers to reconsider the role and significance of the rules based on the triple collaborations among oral health users and oral service providers, the community, and the stakeholders as well as the government. A comprehensive attention is still needed in future revisions of the Dental Benefits Act 2008 according to the contextual factors, socioeconomic and geographical attributes of the population for better implementation of de facto rules and more effective outcomes of the interventions. It is recommended that further research be undertaken utilising a mix-method approach for a holistic view prior to further revisions of the Act or proposal of probable upcoming schemes.

Indexed as

Administrative PersonnelAdvertisingAltruismAustraliaChildEligibility DeterminationHumans

Identifiers

PMID36441685
PMCPMC9704637
OpenAlexW4310092902

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.