ReviewJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research
Economic burden and economic impact of oral diseases in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To quantify the economic burden and financial impact of oral diseases in India-on individuals, households, the health system, and society-focusing on direct and indirect costs and out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE). Methods: Following JBI methodology and PRISMA 2020, we conducted a three-step search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, DOSS, Cochrane CENTRAL, and grey literature. We included India-based studies reporting economic burden/financial impact at individual, household, or population levels. Eligible designs were cost-of-illness, cost/expenditure analyses, and cohort or cross-sectional studies; mixed-methods with extractable quantitative data were included. Two reviewers independently screened, appraised (JBI tools), and extracted data on direct/indirect costs, OOPE, catastrophic expenditure (CHE), and hardship financing. Findings were narratively synthesized; meta-analysis was undertaken in JBI SUMARI where appropriate. Results: Of 1684 records, 15 met inclusion criteria, mostly cross-sectional across states. OOPE varied widely; oral-cancer treatment often ranged from INR 80,000 to over INR 2,30,000. Direct costs were higher in private settings; indirect productivity losses were reported. CHE ranged from 0.6 % to 96 % across definitions; pooling studies using the ≥20 % income threshold yielded a CHE prevalence of 18.8 %. Insurance coverage was low (<15 %) with limited protection. Up to one-third of patients relied on hardship financing (borrowing or asset sales). Conclusion: Oral diseases impose a substantial economic burden in India, characterised by high OOPE, elevated CHE risk (pooled 18.8 %), and frequent distress financing. Priorities include stronger national data, standardised costing/reporting (price year, components, variance), and expanded financial protection to reduce household hardship and advance universal oral health coverage. Systematic review registration number: The protocol is prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (PROSPERO ID: CRD420251030651).
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.