Sarah Arangurem Karam, Helena Silveira Schuch, Flávio Fernando Demarco, Bernardo L. Horta, Luisa N. Borrell, Roger Keller Celeste, Marcos Britto Correa
{"title":"Differential effect of social mobility on tooth loss by race in adulthood: 1982 Pelotas Birth Cohort Study","authors":"Sarah Arangurem Karam, Helena Silveira Schuch, Flávio Fernando Demarco, Bernardo L. Horta, Luisa N. Borrell, Roger Keller Celeste, Marcos Britto Correa","doi":"10.1111/cdoe.12975","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To examine the association between social mobility and tooth loss in adults from the 1982 Pelotas Birth Cohort Study and whether race modifies this association.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The Oral Health Study used data from 541 individuals who were followed up to 31 years of age. Social mobility, composed of the participants' socioeconomic position (SEP) at birth and at age 30, was categorized as never poor, upwardly mobile, downwardly mobile and always poor. The outcome was the prevalence of at least one tooth lost due to dental caries when the participants were examined at 31 years of age. The effect modifier was race (Black/Brown versus white people). Log-binomial regression models were used to estimate crude and sex-adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) and to determine whether the association varied with race. Statistical interactions were tested using an additive scale.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The prevalence of any tooth loss was 50.8% (<i>n</i> = 274). In social mobility groups, the prevalence of at least one tooth lost in the never-poor group was about 31% points higher for Black/Brown (68.2%) than for white people (37.4%). Antagonistic findings were found for the interaction between race and social mobility (Sinergy Index = 0.48; 95% CI 0.24, 0.99; and relative excess of risk due to the interaction = −1.38; 95% CI −2.34, −0.42), suggesting that the observed joint effect of race and social mobility on tooth loss was lower than the expected sum of these factors. The estimates for Black/Brown people were smaller for those who were always poor during their lives, relative to their white counterparts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The findings suggest a higher prevalence of at least one tooth lost among people in the downward mobile SEP group and Black/Brown people. Greater racial inequity was found among Black/Brown people who had never experienced episodes of poverty, with Black/Brown people having a greater prevalence of at least one tooth lost than their white counterparts.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10580,"journal":{"name":"Community dentistry and oral epidemiology","volume":"52 5","pages":"759-765"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community dentistry and oral epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cdoe.12975","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
To examine the association between social mobility and tooth loss in adults from the 1982 Pelotas Birth Cohort Study and whether race modifies this association.
Methods
The Oral Health Study used data from 541 individuals who were followed up to 31 years of age. Social mobility, composed of the participants' socioeconomic position (SEP) at birth and at age 30, was categorized as never poor, upwardly mobile, downwardly mobile and always poor. The outcome was the prevalence of at least one tooth lost due to dental caries when the participants were examined at 31 years of age. The effect modifier was race (Black/Brown versus white people). Log-binomial regression models were used to estimate crude and sex-adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) and to determine whether the association varied with race. Statistical interactions were tested using an additive scale.
Results
The prevalence of any tooth loss was 50.8% (n = 274). In social mobility groups, the prevalence of at least one tooth lost in the never-poor group was about 31% points higher for Black/Brown (68.2%) than for white people (37.4%). Antagonistic findings were found for the interaction between race and social mobility (Sinergy Index = 0.48; 95% CI 0.24, 0.99; and relative excess of risk due to the interaction = −1.38; 95% CI −2.34, −0.42), suggesting that the observed joint effect of race and social mobility on tooth loss was lower than the expected sum of these factors. The estimates for Black/Brown people were smaller for those who were always poor during their lives, relative to their white counterparts.
Conclusions
The findings suggest a higher prevalence of at least one tooth lost among people in the downward mobile SEP group and Black/Brown people. Greater racial inequity was found among Black/Brown people who had never experienced episodes of poverty, with Black/Brown people having a greater prevalence of at least one tooth lost than their white counterparts.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology is to serve as a forum for scientifically based information in community dentistry, with the intention of continually expanding the knowledge base in the field. The scope is therefore broad, ranging from original studies in epidemiology, behavioral sciences related to dentistry, and health services research through to methodological reports in program planning, implementation and evaluation. Reports dealing with people of all age groups are welcome.
The journal encourages manuscripts which present methodologically detailed scientific research findings from original data collection or analysis of existing databases. Preference is given to new findings. Confirmations of previous findings can be of value, but the journal seeks to avoid needless repetition. It also encourages thoughtful, provocative commentaries on subjects ranging from research methods to public policies. Purely descriptive reports are not encouraged, nor are behavioral science reports with only marginal application to dentistry.
The journal is published bimonthly.