Challenges and way forward for implementation of sugar taxation in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).

BACKGROUND: Over consumption of added sugar beyond the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended level of 10% of daily energy intake has well-established negative health consequences including oral diseases. However, the average consumption of added sugar in the Middle East and North Africa region (MENA-World Bank's regional classification) is 70% higher than the WHO recommended level. Imposing taxes on added sugar has been proposed by the WHO to decrease its consumption. Yet, only 21.6% of the total MENA population are covered by taxation policies targeting added sugar. CHALLENGES: Well-recognized challenges for the implementation of sugar taxation in MENA include the tactics used by the food and beverage industry to block these type of policies. However, there are also other unfamiliar hurdles specific to MENA. Historically, there have been incidents of protest and riots partially sparked by increased price of basic commodities, including sugar, in MENA countries. This may affect the readiness of policy makers in the region to impose added sugar taxes. In addition, there are also cultural, lifestyle and consumption behavioural barriers to implementing added sugar taxation. Ultra-processed foods and sugar-sweetened-beverages (SSBs) rich in added sugar are perceived by many in MENA as essential treats regardless of their health risks. Furthermore, some countries even provide subsidies for added sugar. Also, (oral) healthcare providers generally do not engage in policy advocacy mainly due to limited training on health policy. WAYS FORWARD: Here, we discuss these challenges and suggest some ways forward such as (1) support from a health-oriented political leadership, (2) raising public awareness about the health risks of over consumption of sugar, (3) transparency during the policy-cycle development process, (4) providing a free and safe environment for a community dialogue around the proposed policy, (5) training of (oral) healthcare professionals on science communication and policy advocacy in local lay language/dialect, ideally evidence informed from local/regional studies, (6) selecting the appropriate political window of opportunity to introduce a sugar tax policy, and (7) clear and strict conflict of interest regulations to limit the influence of commercial players on health policy.

Does subsidizing the cost of care impact on dental attendance patterns among older adults?

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether eligibility for an age-related universal (pioneer generation [PG]) subsidy incentivises dental attendance by older Singaporeans. METHODS: Data were collected between 2018 and 2021 from in-person interviews of Singaporean adults aged 60-90 years using a questionnaire and a clinical examination. The questionnaire included details of age, gender, ethnicity, education, residential status, socio-economic status, marital status, eligibility for subsidy (community health assistance/CHAS, PG or both) and frequency of dental attendance. The clinical examination recorded number of teeth (categorized as edentulous, 1-9 teeth;10-19 teeth; ≥20 teeth). To estimate the effect of the PG subsidy on dental attendance pattern, a regression discontinuity (RD) analysis was applied using age as the assignment variable. RESULTS: A total of 1172 participants aged 60-90 years (64.2% female) were recruited, with 498 (43%) being eligible for the PG subsidy. For those eligible for PG subsidy, there was a higher proportion of regular attenders than irregular attenders (53.6% vs. 46.4%). In age adjusted RD analysis, those eligible for the PG subsidy were 1.6 (95% CI: 1.0, 2.7) times more likely to report regular attendance than their PG non-eligible counterparts. The association remained strong (OR 2.1; 95% CI: 1.1-3.7) even after further controlling for demographics, socioeconomic factors, number of teeth and eligibility for the CHAS subsidy. CONCLUSIONS: Being eligible for the PG subsidy substantially increased the odds of regular dental attendance.

Situational diagnosis of policies in Latin American and Caribbean countries for the use of fluoride and reduction of sugar consumption.

Policy evaluation and guidance on fluoride use and sugar consumption in Latin American and Caribbean countries (LACC) may provide a scientific evidence basis for policymakers, dental professionals, civil society organizations and individuals committed to improving public oral health. A cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate the extent of implementation of policies/guidelines on fluoride use, and sugar consumption in LACC. The study had two stages. First a questionnaire covering four major areas was developed: fluoridation of public water supplies; salt fluoridation; fluoride dentifrices, and sugar consumption. Then, the questionnaire was applied to collect data among representative participants in public oral health from LACC. Ninety-six participants from 18 LACC answered the questionnaire. One-hundred seventy documents were attached, and 285 links of websites were provided by the respondents. Implementation of policies and guidelines on water and table salt fluoridation and processed and ultra-processed food consumption were found in most countries, with some issues in the consensus and coverage. Thus, differences were identified in the extent of implementation of public oral health strategies on sugar consumption and fluoridation among the countries. There is no consensus on the policies in LACC to reduce sugar consumption and for the use of fluoride. A few policies and guidelines were applied in isolated countries, with a variety of strategies and standards. For future actions, it will be important to encourage the development of strategies and public policies within countries, and to evaluate the effectiveness of existing policies in reducing dental caries and in improving oral health in LACC.

The role of science communication and academic health advocacy in improving population oral health and tackling inequalities.

Oral conditions are a public health problem globally and stark oral health inequalities exist between and within countries. Yet, oral diseases are rarely considered as a health priority and evidence-informed policy generation is challenging. Science communication and health advocacy are critical in that respect. However, due to time limitations, research workload and other factors, academics are usually hindered from participating in such lengthy endeavours. Here, we make the case that 'science communication and health advocacy task forces' should be a priority at academic institutions. The two main duties of these task forces are knowledge transfer about the burden of oral conditions and patterns of inequalities, and their underlying social and commercial determinants, and advocacy and mediation between the stakeholders involved directly or indirectly in policy making. These interdisciplinary task forces, including both academics and non-academics, should collectively have skills that include (1) knowledge about oral health, dental public health and epidemiology, (2) ability to communicate clearly and coherently and make the case in both lay and scientific language terms, (3) familiarity with digital and social media platforms and ability to create visual aids, videos and documentaries, (4) good negotiation skills and (5) maintaining scientific transparency and avoiding getting involved in confrontation with political parties. In the current context, the role of the academic institutions should not only be the production of knowledge, but also the active transferability and application of this knowledge towards public benefit.

Changes in birth outcomes and utilization of prenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a secondary analysis of vital statistics in Colombia.

BACKGROUND: Birth outcomes could have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic through changes in access to prenatal services and other pathways. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on fetal death, birth weight, gestational age, number of prenatal visits, and caesarean delivery in 2020 in Colombia. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data on 3,140,010 pregnancies and 2,993,534 live births from population-based birth certificate and fetal death certificate records in Colombia between 2016 and 2020. Outcomes were compared separately for each month during 2020 with the same month in 2019 and pre-pandemic trends were examined in regression models controlling for maternal age, educational level, marital status, type of health insurance, place of residence (urban/rural), municipality of birth, and the number of pregnancies the mother has had before last pregnancy. RESULTS: We found some evidence for a decline in miscarriage risk in some months after the pandemic start, while there was an apparent lagging increase in stillbirth risk, although not statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons. Birth weight increased during the onset of the pandemic, a change that does not appear to be driven by pre-pandemic trends. Specifically, mean birth weight was higher in 2020 than 2019 for births in April through December by about 12 to 21 g (p < 0.01). There was also a lower risk of gestational age at/below 37 weeks in 2020 for two months following the pandemic (April, June), but a higher risk in October. Finally, there was a decline in prenatal visits in 2020 especially in June-October, but no evidence of a change in C-section delivery. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings suggest mixed early effects of the pandemic on perinatal outcomes and prenatal care utilization in Colombia. While there was a significant decline in prenatal visits, other factors may have had counter effects on perinatal health including an increase in birth weight on average.

Reflections on oral health inequalities: Theories, pathways and next steps for research priorities.

Health inequalities, including those in oral health, are a critical problem of social injustice worldwide, while the COVID-19 pandemic has magnified previously existing inequalities and created new ones. This commentary offers a summary of the main frameworks used in the literature of oral health inequalities, reviews the evidence and discusses the potential role of different pathways/mechanisms to explain inequalities. Research in this area needs now to move from documenting oral health inequalities, towards explaining them, understanding the complex mechanisms underlying their production and reproduction and looking at interventions to tackle them. In particular, the importance of interdisciplinary theory-driven research, intersectionality frameworks and the use of the best available analytical methodologies including qualitative research is discussed. Further research on understanding the role of structural determinants on creating and shaping inequalities in oral health is needed, such as a focus on political economy analysis. The co-design of interventions to reduce oral health inequalities is an area of priority and can highlight the critical role of context and inform decision-making. The evaluation of such interventions needs to consider their public health impact and employ the wider range of methodological tools available rather than focus entirely on the traditional approach, based primarily on randomized controlled trials. Civil society engagement and various advocacy strategies are also necessary to make progress in the field.

Situational diagnosis of policies in Latin American and Caribbean countries for the use of fluoride and reduction of sugar consumption

Abstract Policy evaluation and guidance on fluoride use and sugar consumption in Latin American and Caribbean countries (LACC) may provide a scientific evidence basis for policymakers, dental professionals, civil society organizations and individuals committed to improving public oral health. A cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate the extent of implementation of policies/guidelines on fluoride use, and sugar consumption in LACC. The study had two stages. First a questionnaire covering four major areas was developed: fluoridation of public water supplies; salt fluoridation; fluoride dentifrices, and sugar consumption. Then, the questionnaire was applied to collect data among representative participants in public oral health from LACC. Ninety-six participants from 18 LACC answered the questionnaire. One-hundred seventy documents were attached, and 285 links of websites were provided by the respondents. Implementation of policies and guidelines on water and table salt fluoridation and processed and ultra-processed food consumption were found in most countries, with some issues in the consensus and coverage. Thus, differences were identified in the extent of implementation of public oral health strategies on sugar consumption and fluoridation among the countries. There is no consensus on the policies in LACC to reduce sugar consumption and for the use of fluoride. A few policies and guidelines were applied in isolated countries, with a variety of strategies and standards. For future actions, it will be important to encourage the development of strategies and public policies within countries, and to evaluate the effectiveness of existing policies in reducing dental caries and in improving oral health in LACC.

[Health insurance scheme: main contributor to inequalities in COVID-19 mortality in ColombiaTipo de cobertura de assistência à saúde: o principal fator contribuinte para as desigualdades em mortalidade por COVID-19 na Colômbia]. / Plan de seguro de salud: factor que más contribuye a las desigualdades en la mortalidad por COVID-19 en Colombia.

Objectives: To quantify socioeconomic inequalities in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia and to assess the extent to which type of health insurance, comorbidity burden, area of residence, and ethnicity account for such inequalities. Methods: We analyzed data from a retrospective cohort of COVID-19 cases. We estimated the relative and slope indices of inequality (RII and SII) using survival models for all participants and stratified them by age and gender. We calculated the percentage reduction in RII and SII after adjustment for potentially relevant factors. Results: We identified significant inequalities for the whole cohort and by subgroups (age and gender). Inequalities were higher among younger adults and gradually decreased with age, going from RII of 5.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.25, 9.82) in participants younger than 25 years to RII of 1.49 (95% CI = 1.41, 1.58) in those aged 65 years and older. Type of health insurance was the most important factor, accounting for 20% and 59% of the relative and absolute inequalities, respectively. Conclusions: Significant socioeconomic inequalities exist in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia. Health insurance appears to be the main contributor to those inequalities, posing challenges for the design of public health strategies.

Objetivos: Quantificar as desigualdades socioeconômicas na mortalidade por COVID-19 na Colômbia e avaliar até que ponto o tipo de cobertura de assistência à saúde, a carga de comorbidades, o local de residência e a etnia contribuíram para tais desigualdades. Métodos: Analisamos dados de uma coorte retrospectiva de casos de COVID-19. Calculamos os índices relativo e angular de desigualdade (RII e SII, respectivamente) utilizando modelos de sobrevivência em todos os participantes, estratificando-os por idade e gênero. Calculamos o percentual de redução no RII e no SII após ajuste para fatores possivelmente relevantes. Resultados: Identificamos desigualdades significativas na coorte como um todo e por subgrupos (idade e gênero). As desigualdades foram maiores para adultos mais jovens e decaíram gradualmente com a idade, indo de um RII de 5,65 (intervalo de confiança [IC] de 95% = 3,25; 9,82] nos participantes com idade inferior a 25 anos a um RII de 1,49 [IC 95% = 1,41; 1,58] nas pessoas com 65 anos ou mais. O tipo de cobertura de assistência à saúde foi o fator mais importante, representando 20% e 59% das desigualdades relativa e absoluta, respectivamente. Conclusões: Desigualdades socioeconômicas significativas afetaram a mortalidade por COVID-19 na Colômbia. O tipo de cobertura de saúde parece ser o principal fator contribuinte para essas desigualdades, impondo desafios à elaboração de estratégias de saúde pública.

Health Insurance Scheme: Main Contributor to Inequalities in COVID-19 Mortality in Colombia.

Objectives. To quantify socioeconomic inequalities in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia and to assess the extent to which type of health insurance, comorbidity burden, area of residence, and ethnicity account for such inequalities. Methods. We analyzed data from a retrospective cohort of COVID-19 cases. We estimated the relative and slope indices of inequality (RII and SII) using survival models for all participants and stratified them by age and gender. We calculated the percentage reduction in RII and SII after adjustment for potentially relevant factors. Results. We identified significant inequalities for the whole cohort and by subgroups (age and gender). Inequalities were higher among younger adults and gradually decreased with age, going from RII of 5.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.25, 9.82) in participants younger than 25 years to RII of 1.49 (95% CI = 1.41, 1.58) in those aged 65 years and older. Type of health insurance was the most important factor, accounting for 20% and 59% of the relative and absolute inequalities, respectively. Conclusions. Significant socioeconomic inequalities exist in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia. Health insurance appears to be the main contributor to those inequalities, posing challenges for the design of public health strategies. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S6):S586-S590. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306637).

Plan de seguro de salud: factor que más contribuye a las desigualdades en la mortalidad por COVID-19 en Colombia

[RESUMEN]. Objetivo. Cuantificar las desigualdades socioeconómicas en la mortalidad por COVID-19 en Colombia y evaluar en qué medida el tipo de seguro de salud, la carga de enfermedades concomitantes, la zona de residencia y el origen étnico explican estas desigualdades. Métodos. Se analizaron los datos de una cohorte retrospectiva de casos de COVID-19. Se estimó el índice relativo de desigualdad (IRD) y el índice de desigualdad basado en la pendiente (IDP) utilizando modelos de supervivencia con todos los participantes, y estratificándolos por edad y sexo. El porcentaje de reducción del IRD y el IDP se calculó después de ajustar con respecto a factores que podrían ser relevantes. Resultados. Se pusieron en evidencia desigualdades notables en toda la cohorte y en los subgrupos (edad y sexo). Las desigualdades fueron mayores en los adultos más jóvenes y disminuyeron de manera gradual con la edad, pasando de un IRD de 5,65 (intervalo de confianza de 95% [IC 95%] = 3,25-9,82) en los participan- tes menores de 25 años a un IRD de 1,49 (IC 95% = 1,41-1,58) en los mayores de 65 años. El tipo de seguro de salud fue el factor más importante, al cual se atribuyó 20% de las desigualdades relativas y 59% de las absolutas. Conclusiones. La mortalidad por COVID-19 en Colombia presenta importantes desigualdades socioeconó- micas. El seguro de salud aparece como el factor que más contribuye a estas desigualdades, lo cual plantea retos al diseño de las estrategias de salud pública.

[ABSTRACT]. Objectives. To quantify socioeconomic inequalities in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia and to assess the extent to which type of health insurance, comorbidity burden, area of residence, and ethnicity account for such inequalities. Methods. We analyzed data from a retrospective cohort of COVID-19 cases. We estimated the relative and slope indices of inequality (RII and SII) using survival models for all participants and stratified them by age and gender. We calculated the percentage reduction in RII and SII after adjustment for potentially relevant factors. Results. We identified significant inequalities for the whole cohort and by subgroups (age and gender). Inequalities were higher among younger adults and gradually decreased with age, going from RII of 5.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.25, 9.82) in participants younger than 25 years to RII of 1.49 (95% CI = 1.41, 1.58) in those aged 65 years and older. Type of health insurance was the most important factor, accounting for 20% and 59% of the relative and absolute inequalities, respectively. Conclusions. Significant socioeconomic inequalities exist in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia. Health insu- rance appears to be the main contributor to those inequalities, posing challenges for the design of public health strategies.

[RESUMO]. Objetivos. Quantificar as desigualdades socioeconômicas na mortalidade por COVID-19 na Colômbia e ava- liar até que ponto o tipo de cobertura de assistência à saúde, a carga de comorbidades, o local de residência e a etnia contribuíram para tais desigualdades. Métodos. Analisamos dados de uma coorte retrospectiva de casos de COVID-19. Calculamos os índices relativo e angular de desigualdade (RII e SII, respectivamente) utilizando modelos de sobrevivência em todos os participantes, estratificando-os por idade e gênero. Calculamos o percentual de redução no RII e no SII após ajuste para fatores possivelmente relevantes. Resultados. Identificamos desigualdades significativas na coorte como um todo e por subgrupos (idade e gênero). As desigualdades foram maiores para adultos mais jovens e decaíram gradualmente com a idade, indo de um RII de 5,65 (intervalo de confiança [IC] de 95% = 3,25; 9,82] nos participantes com idade inferior a 25 anos a um RII de 1,49 [IC 95% = 1,41; 1,58] nas pessoas com 65 anos ou mais. O tipo de cobertura de assistência à saúde foi o fator mais importante, representando 20% e 59% das desigualdades relativa e absoluta, respectivamente. Conclusões. Desigualdades socioeconômicas significativas afetaram a mortalidade por COVID-19 na Colômbia. O tipo de cobertura de saúde parece ser o principal fator contribuinte para essas desigualdades, impondo desafios à elaboração de estratégias de saúde pública.

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 .

Plan de seguro de salud: factor que más contribuye a las desigualdades en la mortalidad por COVID-19 en Colombia / Health insurance scheme: main contributor to inequalities in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia / Tipo de cobertura de assistência à saúde: o principal fator contribuinte para as desigualdades em mortalidade por COVID-19 na Colômbia

RESUMEN Objetivo. Cuantificar las desigualdades socioeconómicas en la mortalidad por COVID-19 en Colombia y evaluar en qué medida el tipo de seguro de salud, la carga de enfermedades concomitantes, la zona de residencia y el origen étnico explican estas desigualdades. Métodos. Se analizaron los datos de una cohorte retrospectiva de casos de COVID-19. Se estimó el índice relativo de desigualdad (IRD) y el índice de desigualdad basado en la pendiente (IDP) utilizando modelos de supervivencia con todos los participantes, y estratificándolos por edad y sexo. El porcentaje de reducción del IRD y el IDP se calculó después de ajustar con respecto a factores que podrían ser relevantes. Resultados. Se pusieron en evidencia desigualdades notables en toda la cohorte y en los subgrupos (edad y sexo). Las desigualdades fueron mayores en los adultos más jóvenes y disminuyeron de manera gradual con la edad, pasando de un IRD de 5,65 (intervalo de confianza de 95% [IC 95%] = 3,25-9,82) en los participantes menores de 25 años a un IRD de 1,49 (IC 95% = 1,41-1,58) en los mayores de 65 años. El tipo de seguro de salud fue el factor más importante, al cual se atribuyó 20% de las desigualdades relativas y 59% de las absolutas. Conclusiones. La mortalidad por COVID-19 en Colombia presenta importantes desigualdades socioeconómicas. El seguro de salud aparece como el factor que más contribuye a estas desigualdades, lo cual plantea retos al diseño de las estrategias de salud pública.

ABSTRACT Objectives. To quantify socioeconomic inequalities in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia and to assess the extent to which type of health insurance, comorbidity burden, area of residence, and ethnicity account for such inequalities. Methods. We analyzed data from a retrospective cohort of COVID-19 cases. We estimated the relative and slope indices of inequality (RII and SII) using survival models for all participants and stratified them by age and gender. We calculated the percentage reduction in RII and SII after adjustment for potentially relevant factors. Results. We identified significant inequalities for the whole cohort and by subgroups (age and gender). Inequalities were higher among younger adults and gradually decreased with age, going from RII of 5.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.25, 9.82) in participants younger than 25 years to RII of 1.49 (95% CI = 1.41, 1.58) in those aged 65 years and older. Type of health insurance was the most important factor, accounting for 20% and 59% of the relative and absolute inequalities, respectively. Conclusions. Significant socioeconomic inequalities exist in COVID-19 mortality in Colombia. Health insurance appears to be the main contributor to those inequalities, posing challenges for the design of public health strategies.

RESUMO Objetivos. Quantificar as desigualdades socioeconômicas na mortalidade por COVID-19 na Colômbia e avaliar até que ponto o tipo de cobertura de assistência à saúde, a carga de comorbidades, o local de residência e a etnia contribuíram para tais desigualdades. Métodos. Analisamos dados de uma coorte retrospectiva de casos de COVID-19. Calculamos os índices relativo e angular de desigualdade (RII e SII, respectivamente) utilizando modelos de sobrevivência em todos os participantes, estratificando-os por idade e gênero. Calculamos o percentual de redução no RII e no SII após ajuste para fatores possivelmente relevantes. Resultados. Identificamos desigualdades significativas na coorte como um todo e por subgrupos (idade e gênero). As desigualdades foram maiores para adultos mais jovens e decaíram gradualmente com a idade, indo de um RII de 5,65 (intervalo de confiança [IC] de 95% = 3,25; 9,82] nos participantes com idade inferior a 25 anos a um RII de 1,49 [IC 95% = 1,41; 1,58] nas pessoas com 65 anos ou mais. O tipo de cobertura de assistência à saúde foi o fator mais importante, representando 20% e 59% das desigualdades relativa e absoluta, respectivamente. Conclusões. Desigualdades socioeconômicas significativas afetaram a mortalidade por COVID-19 na Colômbia. O tipo de cobertura de saúde parece ser o principal fator contribuinte para essas desigualdades, impondo desafios à elaboração de estratégias de saúde pública.

Socioeconomic inequalities in birth outcomes: An 11-year analysis in Colombia.

OBJECTIVE: To examine socioeconomic inequalities in birth outcomes among infants born between 2008 and 2018 and assessed trends in inequalities during that period in Colombia, a middle-income country with high levels of inequality emerging from a long internal armed conflict. METHODS: Using birth certificate data in Colombia, we analysed the outcomes of low birth weight, an Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes after birth and the number of prenatal visits among full-term pregnancies. Maternal education and health insurance schemes were used as socioeconomic position (SEP) indicators. Inequalities were estimated using the prevalence/mean of the outcomes across categories of the SEP indicators and calculating the relative and slope indices of inequality (RII and SII, respectively). RESULTS: Among the 5,433,265 full-term singleton births analysed, there was a slight improvement in the outcomes analysed over the study period (lower low-birth-weight and Apgar<7 prevalence rates and higher number of prenatal visits). We observed a general pattern of social gradients and significant relative (RII) and absolute (SII) inequalities for all outcomes across both SEP indicators. RII and SII estimates with their corresponding CIs revealed a general picture of no significant changes in inequalities over time, with some particular, time-dependent exceptions. When comparing the initial and final years of our study period, inequalities in low birth weight related to maternal education increased while those in Apgar score <7 decreased. Relative inequalities across health insurance schemes increased for the two birth outcomes but decreased for the number of prenatal visits. CONCLUSION: The lack of a consistent improvement in the magnitude of inequalities in birth outcomes over an 11-year period is a worrying issue because it could aggravate the cycle of inequality, given the influence of birth outcomes on health, social and economic outcomes throughout the life course. The findings of our analysis emphasize the importance of policies aimed at providing access to quality education and providing a health care system with universal coverage and high levels of integration.

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.

Dental attendance and behavioural pathways to adult oral health inequalities.

BACKGROUND: While inequalities in oral health are documented, little is known about the extent to which they are attributable to potentially modifiable factors. We examined the role of behavioural and dental attendance pathways in explaining oral health inequalities among adults in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. METHODS: Using nationally representative data, we analysed inequalities in self-rated oral health and number of natural teeth. Highest educational attainment, equivalised household income and occupational social class were used to derive a latent socioeconomic position (SEP) variable. Pathways were dental attendance and behaviours (smoking and oral hygiene). We used structural equation modelling to test the hypothesis that SEP influences oral health directly and also indirectly via dental attendance and behavioural pathways. RESULTS: Lower SEP was directly associated with fewer natural teeth and worse self-rated oral health (standardised path coefficients, -0.21 (SE=0.01) and -0.10 (SE=0.01), respectively). We also found significant indirect effects via behavioural factors for both outcomes and via dental attendance primarily for self-rated oral health. While the standardised parameters of total effects were similar between the two outcomes, for number of teeth, the estimated effect of SEP was mostly direct while for self-rated oral health, it was almost equally split between direct and indirect effects. CONCLUSION: Reducing inequalities in dental attendance and health behaviours is necessary but not sufficient to tackle socioeconomic inequalities in oral health.