Question · asked by 1 review
Primary education vs University education: Prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health
In New Zealand, primary versus university education differed by 17.59 percentage points in prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary education vs University education Prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health · Adults aged 25 years and older in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States · 2009, New Zealand, New Zealand In New Zealand, primary versus university education differed by 17.59 percentage points in prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health. Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. (2018) All outcomes | AD 17.59 [7.09, 28.09] | 1 study · 2041 participants | GRADE not reported |
Primary education vs University education Prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health · Adults aged 25 years and older in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States · 2003-2009, Australia; Canada; New Zealand; United States, Overall random-effects meta-analysis Across four countries, primary versus university education differed by 20.49 percentage points in prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health (random-effects meta-analysis; I2=97.1%). Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. (2018) All outcomes | AD 20.49 [4.95, 36.04] | 4 studies · 14960 participants | GRADE not reported |
Primary education vs University education Prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health · Adults aged 25 years and older in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States · 2003-2004, United States, United States In United States, primary versus university education differed by 40.35 percentage points in prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health. Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. (2018) All outcomes | AD 40.35 [35.19, 45.51] | 1 study · 4568 participants | GRADE not reported |
Primary education vs University education Prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health · Adults aged 25 years and older in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States · 2007-2009, Canada, Canada In Canada, primary versus university education differed by 12.86 percentage points in prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health. Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. (2018) All outcomes | AD 12.98 [6.23, 19.73] | 1 study · 3278 participants | GRADE not reported |
Primary education vs University education Prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health · Adults aged 25 years and older in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States · 2004-2006, Australia, Australia In Australia, primary versus university education differed by 10.88 percentage points in prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health. Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. (2018) All outcomes | AD 10.88 [8.42, 13.33] | 1 study · 5073 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. 2018 All outcomes | Not applicable (secondary analysis of existing national survey datasets; no bibliographic literature search) | 6 | Not applicable |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.