One step further in mistreatment research: Assessing the scalability of the Explicit Discrimination Scale among Brazilian working-age adult respondents.

Though the Explicit Discrimination Scale (EDS) has been subjected to extensive psychometric evaluation in Brazil, the instrument has yet to be comprehensively assessed among working-age adult respondents in the country. This study aimed to fill this knowledge gap. Data from around 1200 diverse members of a cohort investigation were used to examine: (1) the positioning of respondents along the continuum of the EDS latent trait; (2) how well the corresponding items represent the EDS construct map; and (3) the extent to which the EDS items follow their expected levels of intensity. We assessed these properties with Loevinger's H, Guttman errors, and Item Response Theory parameters. Findings suggest that two abridged versions of the instrument-but especially the eight-item EDS-may adequately arrange respondents along the latent trait continuum. Analyses also revealed that scale items are reasonably spread over the construct map, with some discrepancy between the expected levels of intensity and their empirical positioning in the corresponding plot. The shortened versions of EDS have good psychometric properties among Brazilian working-age adult respondents. In addition to examining the invariance of the EDS across multiple groups, future psychometric evaluations should assess the external validity of the scale.

[Assessing experiences with discrimination in multiple social groups: invariance analysis of the Explicit Discrimination Scale in university students]. / Aferindo experiências com discriminação em múltiplos grupos sociais: análise de invariância da Escala de Discriminação Explícita em estudantes universitários.

This study evaluated the ability of the Explicit Discrimination Scale (EDS) to produce comparable estimates among respondents according to gender, color/race, and socioeconomic status. Analysis was based on data from two studies with students from Brazilian public universities. An abridged version of the EDS with eight items was evaluated by the alignment method. Findings indicated violation of invariance between color/race and gender groups. Reports of discriminatory experiences had better comparability between socioeconomic status strata. This study showed that EDS should be used with caution, especially to compare discrimination estimates between respondents of different colors/races and genders. The observed violation of invariance reinforces the need for additional research examining whether such a scenario persists in larger and more diverse samples from Brazil.

O objetivo foi avaliar a capacidade da Escala de Discriminação Explícita (EDE) de produzir estimativas comparáveis entre grupos de gênero, cor/raça e posição socioeconômica. A análise se baseou em dados de dois estudos, realizados com estudantes de universidades públicas brasileiras. Uma versão abreviada da EDE com oito itens foi avaliada, utilizando o método alignment (alinhamento). Nossos achados indicaram violação de invariância entre grupos de cor/raça e gênero. Os relatos de experiências discriminatórias tiveram melhor comparabilidade entre estratos de posição socioeconômica. Este estudo demonstrou que a EDE deve ser utilizada com cautela, especialmente para fazer comparações de estimativas de discriminação entre respondentes de cor/raça e gênero distintos. A violação de invariância observada reforça a necessidade de pesquisas adicionais, examinando se tal cenário se mantém em amostras mais amplas e diversas do país.

El objetivo fue evaluar la capacidad de la Escala de Discriminación Explícita (EDE) para producir estimaciones comparables entre grupos de género, color/raza y posición socioeconómica. El análisis se basó en los datos de dos estudios, realizados con estudiantes de universidades públicas brasileñas. Se evaluó una versión abreviada de la EDE con 8 ítems, utilizando el método alignment (alineación). Nuestros hallazgos indicaron una violación de la invariancia entre los grupos de color/raza y género. Los informes de experiencias discriminatorias fueron más comparables entre los estratos de posición socioeconómica. Este estudio demostró que la EDE debe usarse con precaución, especialmente para hacer comparaciones de estimaciones de discriminación entre encuestados distintos de color/raza y género. La violación de la invariancia observada refuerza la necesidad de investigaciones adicionales, examinando si tal escenario se mantiene muestras más amplias y diversas del país.

Discriminatory experiences among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men, and transgender and non-binary individuals: a cross sectional analysis.

Background: Several systems of oppression combine in complex ways to impact the lives of minority populations. Following an intersectionality framework, we assessed the frequency and perceived reasons for discrimination among gay, bisexual, and other cisgender men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender and non-binary individuals (TGNB), stratified by race. Methods: Online survey among MSM and TGNB ≥18 years living in Brazil, between November/2021 and January/2022. We used the 18-item Explicit Discrimination Scale to assess day-to-day experiences of differential treatment, and perceived discrimination. For each item, participants indicated their perceived reasons for differential treatment using 14 pre-defined options. Negative binomial regression models assessed if race was a significant predictor of discrimination. Subsequent models, stratified by race, examined associations of perceived reasons and number of reasons with perceived discrimination. Findings: Of 8464 MSM and TGNB, 4961 (58.6%) were White, 2173 (25.7%) Pardo (Brazil's official term for admixed populations), and 1024 (12.1%) Black. Black participants' scores for perceived discrimination (mean, standard deviation) were higher (10.2, 8.8) [Pardo (6.5, 6.8), White (5.2, 5.7)], and race was both the main reason for and the strongest predictor of perceived discrimination. The number of reasons participants used to interpret their discriminatory experiences was also a predictor of discrimination score among White, Pardo, and Black participants. Interpretation: LGBTQIA+phobia was highly prevalent among all participants. Additionally, our results indicated that Black MSM and TGNB participants were more frequently discriminated against than other racial groups, with racial discrimination uniquely contributing these experiences. Funding: Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro.

Aferindo experiências com discriminação em múltiplos grupos sociais: análise de invariância da Escala de Discriminação Explícita em estudantes universitários / Assessing experiences with discrimination in multiple social groups: invariance analysis of the Explicit Discrimination Scale in university students / Evaluación comparativa de experiencias de discriminación en múltiples grupos sociales: análisis de invariancia de la Escala de Discriminación Explícita en estudiantes universitarios

Resumo: O objetivo foi avaliar a capacidade da Escala de Discriminação Explícita (EDE) de produzir estimativas comparáveis entre grupos de gênero, cor/raça e posição socioeconômica. A análise se baseou em dados de dois estudos, realizados com estudantes de universidades públicas brasileiras. Uma versão abreviada da EDE com oito itens foi avaliada, utilizando o método alignment (alinhamento). Nossos achados indicaram violação de invariância entre grupos de cor/raça e gênero. Os relatos de experiências discriminatórias tiveram melhor comparabilidade entre estratos de posição socioeconômica. Este estudo demonstrou que a EDE deve ser utilizada com cautela, especialmente para fazer comparações de estimativas de discriminação entre respondentes de cor/raça e gênero distintos. A violação de invariância observada reforça a necessidade de pesquisas adicionais, examinando se tal cenário se mantém em amostras mais amplas e diversas do país.

Abstract: This study evaluated the ability of the Explicit Discrimination Scale (EDS) to produce comparable estimates among respondents according to gender, color/race, and socioeconomic status. Analysis was based on data from two studies with students from Brazilian public universities. An abridged version of the EDS with eight items was evaluated by the alignment method. Findings indicated violation of invariance between color/race and gender groups. Reports of discriminatory experiences had better comparability between socioeconomic status strata. This study showed that EDS should be used with caution, especially to compare discrimination estimates between respondents of different colors/races and genders. The observed violation of invariance reinforces the need for additional research examining whether such a scenario persists in larger and more diverse samples from Brazil.

Resumen: El objetivo fue evaluar la capacidad de la Escala de Discriminación Explícita (EDE) para producir estimaciones comparables entre grupos de género, color/raza y posición socioeconómica. El análisis se basó en los datos de dos estudios, realizados con estudiantes de universidades públicas brasileñas. Se evaluó una versión abreviada de la EDE con 8 ítems, utilizando el método alignment (alineación). Nuestros hallazgos indicaron una violación de la invariancia entre los grupos de color/raza y género. Los informes de experiencias discriminatorias fueron más comparables entre los estratos de posición socioeconómica. Este estudio demostró que la EDE debe usarse con precaución, especialmente para hacer comparaciones de estimaciones de discriminación entre encuestados distintos de color/raza y género. La violación de la invariancia observada refuerza la necesidad de investigaciones adicionales, examinando si tal escenario se mantiene muestras más amplias y diversas del país.

Research on racial/ethnic inequities in oral health over the past 80 years: The role of racism.

AIM: This study aims to (1) describe trends in explanations provided for racial/ethnic inequities in dental caries and periodontitis, and (2) explore the patterns of relatedness among explanations for these inequities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Highly cited publications based on studies indexed in the Scopus database were retrieved and assessed for eligibility. Explanations for racial/ethnic inequities were classified into eight different, but interrelated domains. We assessed trends and examined the relations among explanations using multiple correspondence analysis. RESULTS: A total of 200 articles among the most cited publications were selected. The proportion of studies invoking racism as an explanation for racial inequities in oral health increased from 0% to 14.3%, from 1937 to 2020. The proportions of individual socio-economic factors increased from 52.0% to 82.9%, and dental care from 28.0% to 62.9%. The remaining explanations were stable: psychological/behavioural processes (62.5%), biological factors (49.5%), contextual/area-level effects (24.0%) and immigrant paradox (4.0%). Multiple correspondence analysis revealed a smaller axial distance between racism and the following categories: studies from Brazil, recent publications and Blacks/Hispanics/mixed-race groups. Publications about immigrants were axially closer to the high-income countries category. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings call on dental researchers to consider racism as a cause for existing racial/ethnic inequities in oral health.

The Global Prevalence and Severity of Dental Caries among Racially Minoritized Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Racially minoritized children often bear a greater burden of dental caries, but the overall magnitude of racial gaps in oral health and their underlying factors are unknown. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to fill these knowledge gaps. We compared racially minoritized (E) children aged 5-11 years (P) with same-age privileged groups (C) to determine the magnitude and correlates of racial inequities in dental caries (O) in observational studies (S). Using the PICOS selection criteria, a targeted search was performed from inception to December 1, 2021, in nine major electronic databases and an online web search for additional grey literature. The primary outcome measures were caries severity, as assessed by mean decayed, missing, and filled teeth (dmft) among children and untreated dental caries prevalence (d > 0%). The meta-analysis used the random-effects model to calculate standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Subgroup analysis, tests for heterogeneity (I2, Galbraith plot), leave-one-out sensitivity analysis, cumulative analysis, and publication bias (Egger's test and funnel plots) tests were carried out. The New Castle Ottawa scale was used to assess risk of bias. This review was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021282771. A total of 75 publications were included in the descriptive analysis. The SMD of dmft score was higher by 2.30 (95% CI: 0.45, 4.15), and the prevalence of untreated dental caries was 23% (95% CI: 16, 31) higher among racially minoritized children, compared to privileged groups. Cumulative analysis showed worsening caries outcomes for racially marginalized children over time and larger inequities in dmft among high-income countries. Our study highlights the high caries burden among minoritized children globally by estimating overall trends and comparing against factors including time, country, and world income. The large magnitude of these inequities, combined with empirical evidence on the oral health impacts of racism and other forms of oppression, reinforce that oral health equity can only be achieved with social and political changes at a global level.

Conceptualizing inequities and oppression in oral health research.

Major sociohistorical processes have profound effects on oral health, with impacts experienced through structural oppression manifested in policies and practices across the lifespan. Structural oppression drives oral health inequities and impacts population-level oral health. In this global perspective paper, we challenge old assumptions about oral health inequities, address misleading conceptualizations in their description and operation and reframe oral health through the lens of intersecting systems of oppression. Furthermore, we emphasize the need for oral health researchers to explore causal pathways through which oppression harms oral health and engage in social science concepts to understand the root causes of oral health inequities fully. Finally, we call on policymakers, dental scholars and decision makers to consider health equity in all policies and to take a systems-oriented approach to effectively address oral health inequities.

The more you need, the less you get: Intersectionality and the inverse care law in the Brazilian depression care cascade.

Substantial research has shown that the population distribution of major depressive disorder (MDD) is strongly influenced by race, gender, and socioeconomic position. However, a deeper understanding of inequities in access to care for MDD according to these social markers is yet to be reached. We use data from the 2019 Brazilian National Health Survey, which includes 87,187 respondents aged 18 years and over, to test two hypotheses derived from the inverse care law: women, Black, and low-education respondents have higher frequencies of MDD, but lower access to each step of the depression care cascade, including diagnosis by a health professional, regular healthcare visits, and access to specialised treatment (H1); low-education Black women show the highest MDD frequency and the lowest access to care across the entire cascade (H2). Partially supporting H1 and H2, our results reveal a bottleneck in the first step of the depression care cascade. While no racial inequities were observed in the MDD prevalence, Black individuals were less likely than whites to be diagnosed by a health professional (OR 0.74). Women (OR 2.64) and low-education (OR 1.18) were more likely to have probable MDD in relation to men and high-education respondents, respectively, but only women (OR 1.58) were more likely to be diagnosed. Low-education Black women were equally more likely to have probable MDD (OR 3.11) than high-education white men. Conversely, high-education white women emerged as the most likely to be diagnosed with MDD (OR 1.63). Our findings suggest the inverse care law applies to the depression care cascade in Brazil through indication that its healthcare system perpetuates a multilayered system of oppression that overlooks multiply marginalised individuals. We also show that adequate screening by health care professionals should mitigate the complex patterns of inequity revealed by our study.

The Mouth as a Site of Compound Injustices: A Structural Intersectionality Approach to the Oral Health of Working-Age US Adults.

Knowledge of and practice around health inequities have been limited by scarce investigations on intersecting forms of structural oppression, including the extent to which their effects are more severe among multiply marginalized groups. We addressed these insufficiencies by adopting a structural intersectionality approach to the study of edentulism (i.e., complete tooth loss), the dental equivalent of mortality. While individual information was gathered from approximately 200,000 adult (ages 18-64 years) respondents to the 2010 US Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey, state-level data for 2000 and 2010 were obtained from a 2021 study by Homan et al. (J Health Soc Behav. 2021;62(3):350-370) and the US Census. These 3 sources provided information on edentulism, race, sex, structural racism, structural sexism, and income inequality, in addition to multiple covariates. Analyses showed that the intersections between structural sexism and state-level income inequality and structural racism were associated with 1.4 (95% confidence interval: 1.1, 1.9) and 1.5 (95% confidence interval: 1.1, 2.2) times' increased odds of complete tooth loss, respectively. The frequency of edentulism was highest among non-Hispanic Black men residing in states with high structural racism, high structural sexism, and high economic inequality. Based on these and other findings, we highlight the importance of a structural intersectionality approach to research and policy related to health inequities in the United States and elsewhere.

How do state-level racism, sexism, and income inequality shape edentulism-related racial inequities in contemporary United States? A structural intersectionality approach to population oral health.

OBJECTIVE: Research on racial oral health inequities has relied on individual-level data with the premise being that the unequal distribution of dental diseases is an intractable problem. We address these insufficiencies by examining the relationships between structural racism, structural sexism, state-level income inequality, and edentulism-related racial inequities according to a structural intersectionality approach. METHODS: Data were from two sources, the 2010 survey of the U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and Patricia Homan et al.'s (2021) study on the health impacts from interlocking systems of oppression. While the first contains information on edentulism from a large probabilistic sample of older (65+) respondents, the second provides estimates of racism, sexism, and income inequality across the US states. Taking into account a range of individual characteristics and contextual factors in multilevel models, we determine the extent to which structural forms of marginalization underlie racial inequities in edentulism. RESULTS: Our analysis reveals that structural racism, structural sexism, and state-level income inequality are associated with the overall frequency of edentulism and the magnitude of edentulism-related racial inequities, both individually and intersectionally. Coupled with living in states with both high racism and sexism (but not income inequality), the odds of edentulism were 60% higher among non-Hispanic Blacks, relative to Whites residing where these structural oppressions were at their lowest. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide evidence that racial oral health inequities cannot be disentangled from social forces that differentially allocate power and resources among population groups. Mitigating race-based inequities in oral health entails dismantling the multifaceted systems of oppression in the contemporary U.S. society.

Where are race-based oral health inequities bound? Protocol for a systematic review on interventions to tackle racial injustice in dental outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Only three literature reviews have assessed the impact of interventions on the reduction of racial inequities in general health to date; none has drawn from attempts at promoting racial oral health equity. This protocol aims to increase transparency and reduce the potential for bias of an ongoing systematic review conceived to answer the following questions: Are there any interventions to mitigate racial oral health inequities or improve the oral health of racially marginalized groups? If so, how successful have they been at promoting racial oral health equity? How do conclusions of previous reviews change by taking the findings of oral health interventions into account? METHODS: Reviewed studies must deploy interventions to reduce racial gaps or promote the oral health of groups oppressed along ancestral and/or cultural lines. We will analyze randomized clinical trials, natural experiments, pre-post studies, and observational investigations that emulate controlled experiments by assessing interactions between race and potentially health-enhancing interventions. Either clinically assessed or self-reported oral health outcomes will be considered by searching for original studies in MEDLINE, LILACS, PsycInfo, SciELO, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase from their earliest records to March 2022. Upon examining abstracts of conference proceedings, trial registries, reports of related stakeholder organizations, as well as contacting researchers for unpublished data, we will identify studies in the grey literature. If possible, we will carry out a meta-analysis with subgroup and sensitivity analysis, including formal meta-regression, to address potential heterogeneity and inconsistency among selected studies. DISCUSSION: Conducting a systematic review of interventions to mitigate racial oral health inequities is crucial for determining which initiatives work best and under which conditions they succeed. Such knowledge will help consolidate an evidence base that may be used to inform policy and practice against persistent and pervasive racial inequities in general and oral health. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, under the identification number CRD42021261450 .

A Global Perspective of Racial-Ethnic Inequities in Dental Caries: Protocol of Systematic Review.

Though current evidence suggests that racial-ethnic inequities in dental caries persist over time and across space, their magnitude is currently unknown from a global perspective. This systematic review aims to quantify the magnitude of racial/ethnic inequities in dental caries and to deconstruct the different taxonomies/concepts/methods used for racial/ethnic categorization across different populations/nations. This review has been registered in PROSPERO; CRD42021282771. An electronic search of all relevant databases will be conducted until December 2021 for both published and unpublished literature. Studies will be eligible if they include data on the prevalence or severity of dental caries assessed by the decayed, missing, filled teeth index (DMFT), according to indicators of race-ethnicity. A narrative synthesis of included studies and a random-effects meta-analysis will be conducted. Forest plots will be constructed to assess the difference in effect size for the occurrence of dental caries. Study quality will be determined via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the GRADE approach will be used for assessing the quality of evidence. This systematic review will enhance knowledge of the magnitude of racial/ethnic inequities in dental caries globally by providing important benchmark data on which to base interventions to mitigate the problem and to visualize the effects of racism on oral health.

Scaling up research on discrimination and health: The abridged Explicit Discrimination Scale.

Using data from two studies conducted among diverse undergraduate students, we assessed the scalar structure of the Explicit Discrimination Scale (EDS), and developed an abridged version of the instrument. Our findings suggest that the EDS has acceptable scalability properties, including an adequate dispersion of items along the latent trait continuum. Results also support the idea that increasing raw scale scores reflect higher intensities of perceived discrimination. This shortened version of the EDS may be used in large-scale studies on the health impacts of discrimination.

Advancing Intersectional Discrimination Measures for Health Disparities Research: Protocol for a Bilingual Mixed Methods Measurement Study.

BACKGROUND: Guided by intersectionality frameworks, researchers have documented health disparities at the intersection of multiple axes of social status and position, particularly race and ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. To advance from identifying to intervening in such intersectional health disparities, studies that examine the underlying mechanisms are required. Although much research demonstrates the negative health impacts of perceived discrimination along single axes, quantitative approaches to assessing the role of discrimination in generating intersectional health disparities remain in their infancy. Members of our team recently introduced the Intersectional Discrimination Index (InDI) to address this gap. The InDI comprises three measures of enacted (day-to-day and major) and anticipated discrimination. These attribution-free measures ask about experiences of mistreatment because of who you are. These measures show promise for intersectional health disparities research but require further validation across intersectional groups and languages. In addition, the proposal to remove attributions is controversial, and no direct comparison has ever been conducted. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to cognitively and psychometrically evaluate the InDI in English and Spanish and determine whether attributions should be included. METHODS: The study will draw on a preliminary validation data set and three original sequentially collected sources of data: qualitative cognitive interviews in English and Spanish with a sample purposively recruited across intersecting social status and position (gender, sexual orientation, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, age, and nativity); a Spanish quantitative survey (n=500; 250/500, 50% sexual and gender minorities); and an English quantitative survey (n=3000), with quota sampling by race and ethnicity (Black, Latino/a/x, and White), sexual or gender minority status, and gender. RESULTS: The study was funded by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities in May 2021, and data collection began in July 2021. CONCLUSIONS: The key deliverables of the study will be bilingual measures of anticipated, day-to-day, and major discrimination validated for multiple health disparity populations using qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/30987.

Challenges in identifying indigenous peoples in population oral health surveys: a commentary.

There are currently 370 million persons identifying as indigenous across 90 countries globally. Indigenous peoples generally face substantial exclusion/marginalization and poorer health status compared with non-indigenous majority populations; this includes poorer oral health status and reduced access to dental services. Population-level oral health surveys provide data to set priorities, inform policies, and monitor progress in dental disease experience/dental service utilisation over time. Rigorously and comprehensively measuring the oral health burden of indigenous populations is an ethical issue, though, given that survey instruments and sampling procedures are usually not sufficiently inclusive. This results in substantial underestimation or even biased estimation of dental disease rates and severity among indigenous peoples, making it difficult for policy makers to prioritise resources in this area. The methodological challenges identified include: (1) suboptimal identification of indigenous populations; (2) numerator-denominator bias and; (3) statistical analytic considerations. We suggest solutions that can be implemented to strengthen the visibility of indigenous peoples around the world in an oral health context. These include acknowledgment of the need to engage indigenous peoples with all data-related processes, encouraging the use of indigenous identifiers in national and regional data sets, and mitigating and/or carefully assessing biases inherent in population oral health methodologies for indigenous peoples.

Does the Everyday Discrimination Scale generate meaningful cross-group estimates? A psychometric evaluation.

RATIONALE: Studies linking discrimination to poor mental and physical health constitute one of the most robust branches of health inequities research. For more than two decades, and in more than a dozen countries, scholars working in this field have used the Everyday Discrimination Scale (EDS) to assess perceptions of discrimination. Two recent studies (Harnois et al., 2020; Harnois et al., 2019) cast doubt on the instrument's psychometric equivalence across diverse social groups, however. OBJECTIVE: Our study builds on these previous analyses using a larger and more ethnically and geographically diverse sample of adults in the US, the Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Surveys. METHOD: Multi-group Confirmatory Factor Analyses were carried out to compare the configural, metric, and scalar structures of the EDS. RESULTS: Analyzing perceptions of racial/ethnic discrimination, we find a lack of equivalence across race/ethnicity, consistent with previous research. Reports of general mistreatment are found to be equivalent across gender-based groups, but not across race/ethnicity, age- or education-based groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides further evidence that the EDS should be used with caution, particularly when assessing general perceptions of discrimination, and particularly when making cross-group comparisons. Measurement invariance is required to effectively assess the relationship between discrimination and health; further refinement of the scale may be needed to achieve this goal.

Advancing racial equity in oral health (research): more of the same is not enough.

By critically appraising the literature on the oral health effects of race-based oppression, this focus article makes four recommendations that may both facilitate more nuanced research on the topic and mitigate racial/ethnic inequities in (oral) health. The first is recognizing that science itself may perpetuate racial/ethnic injustice, such that adopting a 'neutral' position must be replaced with actively fostering anti-racist narratives. The second is to not imply that racial oppression is bad because it harms oral health. Rather, studies should help build a fairer world, wherein oral health inequities would not abound. The third recommendation is encouraging initiatives that understand systems of oppression as conjointly operating to shape oral health. The fourth and final recommendation is taking race-based oppression as a multi-level system that operates on three inter-related conceptual levels - intra-personal, inter-personal, and structural. The extent to which scholars, practitioners, and policymakers are willing to follow these recommendations may determine how successful attempts to eradicate (oral) health inequities might be. Learning from, and avoiding mistakes made in, previous publications is one ethical pathway towards this end.