ArticleFrontiers in oral health2024
Comparing two large data repositories to understand the differences in demographics, health history, and behavioral attributes in populations.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
Introduction: This study conducted a comparative analysis between two large data repositories, the All of Us (AoU) medical data and BigMouth dental data repositories. Methods: The comparison analysis includes variables related to behavioral and systemic health, health literacy, and overall health status across race, ethnicity, and gender. The analytic approach used descriptive statistics, Chi-square, odds ratio, and 95% confidence intervals; significant comparisons were measured with Cohen's D effect sizes. Results: In the AoU dataset, 80.6% of Hispanic or Latino participants reported alcohol use compared to 16.8% in the BigMouth data repository. The female cohort in AoU showed 87.9% alcohol use, a contrast to BigMouth's 26.0%. Additionally, the diabetes prevalence among females was 8.8% in AoU vs. 21.6% in BigMouth. Differences in health literacy were observed, with 49.2% among Hispanic or Latino participants in AoU, in contrast to BigMouth's 3.2%. Despite this, 70.1% of Hispanic or Latino respondents in AoU reported satisfactory health status, while BigMouth indicated a much higher figure at 98.3%. Discussion: These variations highlight the importance of targeted health interventions addressing racial/ethnic and gender influences. Differences may arise from recruitment approaches, participant demographics, and healthcare access. There is a need for collaboration, standardized data collection, and inclusive recruitment to remedy these discrepancies. Further research is imperative to understand the underlying causes, facilitate interventions that address the disparities, and advocate for a more inclusive healthcare system.
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.