↓ Skip to main content

Early childhood caries in Switzerland: a marker of social inequalities

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Oral Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
173 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Early childhood caries in Switzerland: a marker of social inequalities
Published in
BMC Oral Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12903-015-0066-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stéphanie Baggio, Marcelo Abarca, Patrick Bodenmann, Mario Gehri, Carlos Madrid

Abstract

Early childhood caries (ECC) is a marker of social inequalities worldwide because disadvantaged children are more likely to develop caries than their peers. This study aimed to define the ECC prevalence among children living in French-speaking Switzerland, where data on this topic were scarce, and to assess whether ECC was an early marker of social inequalities in this country. The study took place between 2010 and 2012 in the primary care facility of Lausanne Children's Hospital. We clinically screened 856 children from 36 to 71 months old for ECC, and their caregivers (parents or legal guardians) filled in a questionnaire including items on socioeconomic background (education, occupation, income, literacy and immigration status), dental care and dietary habits. Prevalence rates, prevalence ratios and logistic regressions were calculated. The overall ECC prevalence was 24.8 %. ECC was less frequent among children from higher socioeconomic backgrounds than children from lower ones (prevalence ratios ≤ 0.58). This study reported a worrying prevalence rate of ECC among children from 36 to 71 months old, living in French-speaking Switzerland. ECC appears to be a good marker of social inequalities as disadvantaged children, whether from Swiss or immigrant backgrounds, were more likely to have caries than their less disadvantaged peers. Specific preventive interventions regarding ECC are needed for all disadvantaged children, whether immigrants or Swiss.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Unknown 172 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 19%
Student > Bachelor 16 9%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Researcher 10 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 6%
Other 32 18%
Unknown 60 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 76 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 5%
Psychology 4 2%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 11 6%
Unknown 67 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 July 2015.
All research outputs
#18,420,033
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#995
of 1,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,670
of 263,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#16
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,468 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.