ArticleBMC oral health2026
Early twice-daily toothbrushing and adolescent dental caries: a causal inference analysis using the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children.
Article in BMC oral 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDental caries is a highly prevalent chronic childhood condition, yet longitudinal evidence linking early oral hygiene behaviours to long-term outcomes remains limited. This study estimated whether twice-daily toothbrushing at age 2-3 years was associated with lower incident dental caries through adolescence, under a target trial emulation framework.
methodsData were from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC) B-cohort (N = 5,107). Children with caries at or before Wave 2 (age 2-3) were excluded, yielding an incident sample of 2,970. Associations were estimated using multivariable logistic regression, propensity score matching, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE), and g-computation. The outcome was carer-reported dental caries. Confounders were identified via directed acyclic graph (DAG) analysis. Effect modification by area-level socioeconomic position (SEP) was assessed through a pre-specified equity analysis.
resultsAmong 2,941 children in the analytic sample, 1,559 (53.0%) developed carer-reported caries by age 14-15. Caries incidence was lower among children who brushed twice daily: 660 of 1,359 (48.6%) versus 899 of 1,582 (56.8%) in the less frequent group. The primary adjusted odds ratio (aOR) was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.63-0.85, p < 0.001). A dose-response gradient was observed (p-trend < 0.001). Effect estimates were similar across analytical approaches (OR range: 0.72-0.75). In non-disadvantaged areas, protective associations were observed (aOR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.54-0.79). In disadvantaged areas, the association was weaker and not statistically significant (aOR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.71-1.17; interaction p = 0.035). An exploratory falsification analysis using dental pain yielded a null result (aOR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.91-1.23, p = 0.47), but this outcome was interpreted cautiously because dental pain may lie downstream of caries.
conclusionsTwice-daily toothbrushing by age 2-3 years was associated with a lower risk of incident adolescent caries. Estimates from multiple causal inference approaches were consistent with an absolute risk reduction of approximately 8% points (NNT ≈ 13), under assumptions of no unmeasured confounding, adequate positivity, and correct model specification. Protective associations appeared concentrated in non-disadvantaged areas, suggesting that oral hygiene promotion should be combined with broader preventive strategies addressing structural determinants of oral health.
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.