MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416527731 · doi:10.1177/0265539x251400595

Socioeconomic inequalities in the association between secondhand smoke exposure and tooth loss in Brazil

2025· article· en· W4416527731 on OpenAlexaff
Leandro Machado Oliveira, Fernando L. Kloeckner, Jaíne C. Uliana, Karla Zanini Kantorski, Fabrício Batistin Zanatta

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity dental health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsLogistic regressionSocioeconomic statusSecondhand smokeDentitionCross-sectional studyTooth lossAssociation (psychology)Oral healthSocial class

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ObjectiveTo determine if (a) secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure is associated with tooth loss and (b) such a relationship is modified by socioeconomic position (SEP).MethodsData were from the 2019 Brazilian National Health Survey. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression and binary logistic regression were employed to examine the association between monthly exposure to SHS at home or at work with extent of teeth lost and lack of functional dentition (FD), respectively. Effect Measure Modification (EMM) analyses and the simple slope test explored whether the association varied with levels of education, wealth, and income.ResultsThe sample comprised 53,295 never smoker adults. Those exposed to SHS had 4% (95% CI: 1.01; 1.07) more lost teeth, were 19% (95% CI: 0.72; 0.92) more likely to have lost teeth, and were 25% (95% CI: 1.06; 1.47) more likely to lack a FD. A super-additive association was found when comparing participants exposed to SHS with incomplete elementary school and those unexposed to SHS with complete higher education (relative excess risk due to interaction of 0.97 [95% CI: 0.45; 1.49]). Such an EMM was less noticeable when examining other SEP measures.ConclusionSHS exposure was consistently associated with tooth loss; however, there appear to be key differences according to education levels.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunity dental healthSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207