Appalachian Numeracy and Literacy and Oral Health, an Ecological Study, PIAAC and BRFSS

IF 1.8 4区医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Journal of public health dentistry Pub Date : 2025-03-22 DOI:10.1111/jphd.12672

R. Constance Wiener, Christopher Waters, Meghan Bastin

{"title":"Appalachian Numeracy and Literacy and Oral Health, an Ecological Study, PIAAC and BRFSS","authors":"R. Constance Wiener, Christopher Waters, Meghan Bastin","doi":"10.1111/jphd.12672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Social determinants of health (SDOH) include healthcare access, neighborhood/built environment, social context, economic stability, and education (including literacy and numeracy). These are known factors for health outcomes. The purpose of this research is to consider one SDOH category: general literacy/numeracy levels, with poor oral health indicators in a comparison of U.S. national and Appalachia data, a region with many poor healthcare indicators.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>For this ecological study, literacy/numeracy data were from the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) Survey of Adult Skills, 2012–2017. Oral health indicators were from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2012–2016.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of a possible score of 500 for literacy/numeracy, the mean national scores were 263.5(95% CI: 262.0, 265.1) and 249.1 (95% CI: 247.5, 250.6), respectively. The mean scores for all Appalachian counties were similar (262.2; 95% CI: 261.3, 263.1; <i>p</i> = 0.7258) and (247.6; 95% CI: 246.6, 248.6; <i>p</i> = 0.6872), respectively. However, within state comparisons had several non-Appalachian counties with higher literacy/numeracy scores than their Appalachian counties (Kentucky, Ohio, and Virginia) while in Alabama, the reverse occurred. Overall, state-wide, dental visits were not significantly different from national levels in crude percentages; however, missing any permanent teeth and edentulism were higher than the nation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Health concerns, and oral health concerns in particular, are significant for the Appalachian region. However, dental visits and the mean overall general literacy/numeracy skills were not significantly different from the nation's, indicating that other factors are driving poor health outcomes within Appalachia from an ecological perspective.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of public health dentistry","volume":"85 2","pages":"203-210"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of public health dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jphd.12672","RegionNum":4,"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

Social determinants of health (SDOH) include healthcare access, neighborhood/built environment, social context, economic stability, and education (including literacy and numeracy). These are known factors for health outcomes. The purpose of this research is to consider one SDOH category: general literacy/numeracy levels, with poor oral health indicators in a comparison of U.S. national and Appalachia data, a region with many poor healthcare indicators.

Methods

For this ecological study, literacy/numeracy data were from the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) Survey of Adult Skills, 2012–2017. Oral health indicators were from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2012–2016.

Results

Of a possible score of 500 for literacy/numeracy, the mean national scores were 263.5(95% CI: 262.0, 265.1) and 249.1 (95% CI: 247.5, 250.6), respectively. The mean scores for all Appalachian counties were similar (262.2; 95% CI: 261.3, 263.1; p = 0.7258) and (247.6; 95% CI: 246.6, 248.6; p = 0.6872), respectively. However, within state comparisons had several non-Appalachian counties with higher literacy/numeracy scores than their Appalachian counties (Kentucky, Ohio, and Virginia) while in Alabama, the reverse occurred. Overall, state-wide, dental visits were not significantly different from national levels in crude percentages; however, missing any permanent teeth and edentulism were higher than the nation.

Conclusion

Health concerns, and oral health concerns in particular, are significant for the Appalachian region. However, dental visits and the mean overall general literacy/numeracy skills were not significantly different from the nation's, indicating that other factors are driving poor health outcomes within Appalachia from an ecological perspective.

查看原文本刊更多论文

阿巴拉契亚人的计算能力和读写能力与口腔健康，一项生态研究，PIAAC和BRFSS。

目标：健康的社会决定因素（SDOH）包括医疗保健获取、社区/建筑环境、社会背景、经济稳定和教育（包括识字和算术）。这些都是影响健康结果的已知因素。本研究的目的是考虑一个SDOH类别：一般识字/计算水平，在美国国家和阿巴拉契亚数据的比较中，口腔健康指标较差，这是一个医疗保健指标较差的地区。方法：在这项生态研究中，读写/计算数据来自2012-2017年国际成人能力评估计划（PIAAC）成人技能调查。口腔健康指标来源于2012-2016年行为危险因素监测系统。结果：在识字/计算的可能得分为500分中，全国平均得分分别为263.5（95% CI: 262.0, 265.1）和249.1 （95% CI: 247.5, 250.6）。所有阿巴拉契亚县的平均得分相似(262.2；95% ci: 261.3, 263.1；P = 0.7258)和(247.6；95% ci: 246.6, 248.6；P = 0.6872)。然而，在州内比较中，有几个非阿巴拉契亚县的读写/计算成绩高于阿巴拉契亚县（肯塔基州、俄亥俄州和弗吉尼亚州），而在阿拉巴马州，情况正好相反。总体而言，在全州范围内，牙科就诊在粗百分比上与全国水平没有显著差异；但是，缺恒牙和缺牙率高于全国。结论：健康问题，尤其是口腔健康问题，在阿巴拉契亚地区是非常重要的。然而，看牙医和平均总体识字/算术技能与全国没有显著差异，这表明从生态角度来看，其他因素正在导致阿巴拉契亚地区的健康状况不佳。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of public health dentistry 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生

CiteScore

3.80

自引率

4.30%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Public Health Dentistry is devoted to the advancement of public health dentistry through the exploration of related research, practice, and policy developments. Three main types of articles are published: original research articles that provide a significant contribution to knowledge in the breadth of dental public health, including oral epidemiology, dental health services, the behavioral sciences, and the public health practice areas of assessment, policy development, and assurance; methods articles that report the development and testing of new approaches to research design, data collection and analysis, or the delivery of public health services; and review articles that synthesize previous research in the discipline and provide guidance to others conducting research as well as to policy makers, managers, and other dental public health practitioners.