ArticleBMC public health2026
Preferred conditions for promoting participation in on-site oral health surveys among Japanese adults: insights from a conjoint analysis.
Article in BMC public health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOn-site oral health surveys conducted to epidemiologically assess dental diseases require strategies to prevent a decline in the number of participants and maintain data quality; however, few studies have examined measures to address this issue. This study aimed to identify the preferred conditions for promoting participation in on-site oral health surveys using conjoint analysis.
methodsA cross-sectional study using an online survey was conducted in Japan in January 2024. From a panel of an online research company, 1,260 individuals (420 residents of urban, intermediate, and rural areas) were randomly sampled. The participants were evaluated under 16 hypothetical scenarios for oral health surveys, each consisting of seven attributes and their respective levels. Monetary incentives were excluded as attributes, because such measures are typically not applicable to government-administered surveys.
resultsIn total, 955 individuals were analysed (324 in urban areas; 333 in intermediate areas; and 298 in rural areas). Our conjoint analysis showed that in all three areas, the preferred conditions to promote participation in oral health surveys were nearby dental clinics, conducting the survey on a Saturday or Sunday, providing an explanation of oral health status by a dentist after the survey, and provision of small gifts such as toothbrushes. Conversely, the following conditions were rated unfavourably: location-home visits by investigators, and day of the week-weekdays. The modified Poisson regression analysis revealed that those who did not intend to participate in all 16 hypothetical scenarios were statistically significantly more likely to be older in urban and intermediate areas (prevalence ratio, urban, 60-69 years: 2.52; intermediate, 60-69 years: 2.19).
conclusionsOur findings suggest that an effective strategy to promote participation in on-site oral health surveys includes conducting a survey at nearby dental clinics on holidays, providing participants with an explanation of their oral health status by a dentist, and distributing small gifts such as toothbrushes after the survey. In addition, targeted approaches may be required to encourage participation among older adults, particularly in urban and intermediate areas.
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.