4.6 Article

Social Gradients in Oral Health in Older Adults: Findings From the English Longitudinal Survey of Aging

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 101, Issue 10, Pages 1892-1899

Publisher

AMER PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOC INC
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300215

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. UK Department of Health's National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre
  2. US National Institute on Aging [2RO1AG7644-01A1, 2RO1AG017644]
  3. consortium of UK government departments [PU-10/0431]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. We examined prospective associations between socioeconomic position (SEP) markers and oral health outcomes in a national sample of older adults in England. Methods. Data were from the English Longitudinal Survey of Aging, a national cohort study of community-dwelling people aged 50 years and older. SEP markers (education, occupation, household income, household wealth, subjective social status, and childhood SEP) and sociodemographic confounders (age, gender, and marital status) were from wave 1. We collected 3 self-reported oral health outcomes at wave 3: having natural teeth (dentate vs edentate), self-rated oral health, and oral impacts on daily life. Using multivariate logistic regression models, we estimated associations between each SEP indicator and each oral health outcome, adjusted for confounders. Results. Irrespective of SEP marker, there were inverse graded associations between SEP and edentulousness, with proportionately more edentate participants at each lower SEP level. Lower SEP was also associated with worse selfrated oral health and oral impacts among dentate, but not among edentate, participants. Conclusions. There are consistent and clear social gradients in the oral health of older adults in England, with disparities evident throughout the SEP hierarchy. (Am J Public Health. 2011;101:1892-1899. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011.300215)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available