Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37314086›Full record

ArticleJournal of dental research2023

Rethinking Oral Health in Aging: Ecosocial Theory and Intersectionality.

L Slack-Smith, T Ng, M E Macdonald, A Durey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of dental research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors.

L Slack-SmithSchool of Population and Global Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5859-7055
T NgSchool of Population and Global Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8700-7752
M E MacdonaldDepartment of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada.
A DureySchool of Population and Global Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Poor oral health affects the health and well-being of older adults in many ways. Despite years of international research investigating poor oral health among older adults, it has remained a largely unresolved problem. The aim of this article is to explore the combination of 2 key frameworks, ecosocial theory and intersectionality, to guide our exploration and understanding of oral health and aging and help inform research, education, policy, and services. Proposed by Krieger, ecosocial theory is concerned with the symbiotic relationship among embodied biological processes and social, historical, and political contexts. Building on the work of Crenshaw, intersectionality explores how social identities such as race, gender, socioeconomic status, and age interconnect in ways that can enhance privilege or compound discrimination and social disadvantage. Intersectionality offers a layered understanding of how power relations reflected in systems of privilege or oppression influence an individual's multiple intersecting social identities. Understanding this complexity and the symbiotic relationships offers an opportunity to reconsider how inequities in oral health for older adults can be addressed in research, education, and practice and increase the focus on equity, prevention, interdisciplinary care, and use of innovative technology.

Indexed as

Intersectional FrameworkOral HealthEducational StatusHealth Status Disparitieshealthcare disparitiesintersectional frameworkresearch methodologysocial determinants of healthsocial inequitysocial isolation

Identifiers

PMID37314086
PMCPMC10345992

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.