ArticleBMC public health2025
Social inequities in general health and oral health among Australian adults over time.
Article in BMC public 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSocial inequality in health is a persistent and growing concern worldwide. The study aimed to describe and analyse social disparities in general and oral health among Australian adults over time.
methodsThis study utilised two population-based cross-sectional survey data: the National Survey of Adult Oral Health (NSAOH) conducted in 2004-06 (NSAOH-1, n = 14,123) and 2017-18 (NSAOH-2, n = 15,731) in Australia. Representative samples of adults aged 15 years and over were recruited from metropolitan and regional areas in each state and territory using a three-stage, stratified sampling design. Outcome variables were self-rated general and oral health conditions. Explanatory variables included socioeconomic status- assessed using equivalised household income and divided into roughly equal quartile groups from lowest to highest- along with sociodemographic characteristics, culturally and linguistically diverse status, and oral health-related behaviours. Both unadjusted and adjusted absolute prevalence differences (PDs) of fair/poor general and oral health with 95% confidence intervals were calculated to assess income-related inequality. Adjustments were made for age and sex to the average covariate distribution of the four household income groups combined.
resultsThe prevalence of fair/poor general and oral health increased from 10.6% to 15.0% and from 16.4% to 23.9%, respectively, over the 14-year survey period. Across all household income quartiles, the prevalence of fair/poor general and oral health was higher in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1. The adjusted model showed that the prevalence increase was most marked for the second lowest household income group (Q2), from 18.7% to 26.7% (PD = 8.0%) for oral health and the second highest household income group (Q3), from 6.4% to 10.8% (PD = 4.4%) for general health.
conclusionOur study revealed social inequalities in general and oral health among Australian adults over 14 years, with age, sex, place of residence, irregular dental visits, and dental insurance being significant factors contributing to these inequities.
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.