ArticleBrazilian dental journal2024
Economic Evaluation of Community Water Fluoridation in an Upper-Middle-Income Country.
Article in Brazilian dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community water fluoridation policy and population oral health: a policy analysis.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Discounting Practices in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in Dentistry: A Systematic Review of Studies Published After 2020.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim was to estimate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of CWF for schoolchildren according to different population sizes served in Brazil. The economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective. Total costs were estimated using four variables across different population sizes: capital cost of initial installation, chemical product costs, system operational costs, and monitoring costs. The effect of CWF was analyzed in the context of the widespread use of fluoridated toothpaste, based on studies with Brazilian population groups. The total cost of dental treatment was estimated, including both direct and indirect costs, with a discount rate of 3.5%. A one-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the robustness of the results based on measured parameter values. The costs averted due to CWF were US$174.40 and US$85.67 for children aged 5-8 and 3-12 years, respectively, and US$46.66 for those aged 7-12 years, according to the average effectiveness of CWF for each age group. The cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit ratio results were favorable in all scenarios where the population served was 6,000 or more inhabitants. Scenarios unfavorable to CWF were observed only in populations of up to 2,000 inhabitants. The economic evaluation of CWF in an upper-middle-income country proved to be a cost-effective oral health intervention and more economically advantageous, especially in larger areas for both deciduous and permanent dentition.
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.