ArticleBMC oral health2025
Exploring schoolchildren's perspectives on oral health in a disadvantaged neighbourhood in The Hague - a participatory action research project.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimDental caries is the most common childhood disease worldwide, including the Netherlands. Children from low socioeconomic backgrounds and migrant communities are at high risk. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of schoolchildren (9-13 years), from a low socioeconomic neighbourhood in The Hague with a high immigrant population, on oral health, oral health behaviours, oral health professionals and dental care, as well as the root causes and the outcomes of oral health problems. A secondary aim was to co-create suitable oral health interventions with the children. METHODOLOGY: The study used a Participatory Action Research (PAR) approach involving 9 focus group discussions (FGDs) with 45 children, semi-structured in-depth interviews with 4 children, 3 informal conversations with adult stakeholders (the school's principal, a teacher, and a women's group 'SW mothers' consisting of 24 women), participant observation in the neighbourhood, and food diaries from 7 children. The research team immersed themselves in the community for 8 months. The study comprised three phases with the children: 1) exploring children's perspectives on oral health, 2) identifying root causes and outcomes of oral health problems constructing a 'problem tree', and 3) co-creating solutions. In phase 4 data were analysed using thematic analysis, and findings were structured according to the Fisher-Owens model, highlighting child-level, family-level, and community-level influences on children's oral health.
resultsChildren demonstrated oral health knowledge, understanding links between diet, oral health, and social status. They reported conflicting perspectives towards dental professionals, who were seen as kind, but also scary, leading to low dental care utilisation. Poverty in the neighbourhood contributed to 'parentification'. Children were often responsible for their own and their siblings' diet and oral health. Although health initiatives existed, cultural traditions and the local unhealthy food environment influenced dietary habits.
conclusionWhile children understood the importance of oral health, socioeconomic and cultural factors hindered their ability to act upon their knowledge. Poverty and the local food environment were identified as key challenges. This PAR project raised awareness, empowering children to drive positive change and share knowledge with their community through a self-made YouTube video and folder on toothbrushing, regular dental visits and healthy eating.
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.