ArticleJDR clinical and translational research2026
Cost-Utility Analysis of Treatments for Early Childhood Caries in Remote Aboriginal Communities.
Article in JDR clinical and translational research, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEarly childhood caries is a significant problem affecting Aboriginal preschoolers in remote communities who lack access to dental services. A trial was conducted to assess the benefits of atraumatic restorative treatment combined with the Hall technique (ART-HT) versus usual care for managing early childhood caries in this population.
objectivesThis trial-based cost-utility analysis evaluates costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of ART-HT compared with usual care within a 1-y time frame.
methodsA decision-analytic model simulated the costs and QALYs for 2 scenarios: trial service delivery and minimum ART-HT delivery. The incremental cost per QALY gain ratio (ICER) was calculated for each scenario. QALY were estimated using the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale-4D (ECOHIS-4D) and adjusted for baseline. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the base-case results. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated to determine the likelihood of ART-HT being cost-effective at various willingness-to-pay thresholds. All costs are presented in Australian dollars for 2021.
resultsChildren receiving ART-HT had slightly higher QALYs than those receiving usual care did (0.85 vs. 0.83). The base-case analysis showed an average ICER of $2,013/QALY gained (95% uncertainty interval -$45,246 to $21,676). In the sensitivity analysis, the average ICER was $2,573/QALY gained (95% uncertainty interval -$43,658 to $23,352). ART-HT had an 85% and 81% chance of being cost-effective at a $15,000/QALY gained threshold in the base-case and alternative scenario, respectively.
conclusionART-HT showed potential cost-effectiveness compared with usual care within the observed period. While QALY gains were modest, ART-HT may offer a valuable strategy to improve service access for Aboriginal children in remote communities.Knowledge Transfer Statement:This study demonstrates that atraumatic restorative treatment combined with the Hall technique (ART-HT) is cost-effective in managing early childhood caries in remote Aboriginal communities. By providing a viable dental care strategy, ART-HT can improve access to essential dental services, enhance oral health outcomes for Aboriginal preschoolers, and offer value for money, thereby contributing to overall better health in these underserved populations.
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.