We assess inequality of opportunity in educational achievement in six Latin American countries, employing two waves of PISA data (2006 and 2009). By means of a non-parametric approach using a decomposable inequality index, GE(0), we rank countries according to their degree of inequality of opportunity. We work with alternative characterizations of types: school type (public or private), gender, parental education, and combinations of those variables. We calculate 'incremental contributions' of each set of circumstances to inequality. We provide rankings of countries based on unconditional inequalities (using conventional indices) and on conditional inequalities (EOp indices), and the two sets of rankings do not always coincide. Inequality of opportunities range from less than 1% to up to 27%, with substantial heterogeneity according to the year, the country, the subject and the speci…cication of circumstances. Robustness checks based on bootstrap and the use of an alternative index con…rm most of the initial results.

Participants' caries experience was high. The radiographic assessment significantly contributed to caries experience. Molar and upper incisor teeth were most prone to caries.

No abstract

A caries-epidemiological study using the ICDASepi-merged system was conducted in Colombian young children. This study aimed at associating the time needed for the clinical examination of caries and caries risk in 1 to 5-year-old children according to age and caries risk, and to assess behavior and child pain self-perception during examination according to age. After IRB approval and given parents/caregivers’ informed consent, seven trained examiners assessed 1 to 5-year olds in kindergartens under local field conditions. ICDASepi-merged caries experience (depiMEmf) was assessed as follows: Initial-depi (ICDAS 1/2 without air-drying); Moderate-dM (ICDAS 3,4); Extensive-dE (ICDAS 5,6) lesions; due-to-caries fillings-f and missing-m surfaces/teeth. Caries risk was assessed with Cariogram®. Child’s behavior (Frankl-Behavior-Rating-Scale) and self-perceived pain (Visual-Analogue-Scale-of-Faces) during examination were evaluated. Clinical examination time was recorded with a stopwatch. A total of 592 children participated (1-yr.: n=31; 2-yrs.: n=96; 3-yrs.: n=155; 4-yrs.: n=209, 5-yrs.: n=101). The depiMEmfs prevalence was of 79.9% and the mean 8.4±10.4. Most were high-caries-risk children (68.9%). The majority (58.9%) showed ≥ positive-behavior and ≤ light-pain self-perception (88.4%). Mean clinical examination time was around 3.5 minutes (216.9±133.9 seconds). For 5-yr. olds it corresponded to 4 minutes (240.4±145.0 seconds) vs. 2 minutes (122.8±80.1 seconds) for 1-yr. olds (Kruskal-Wallis; p=0.00). For high- and low-caries risk children it was around 4.3 minutes (255.7±118.5 seconds) and 3.3 minutes (201.3±129.4 seconds), respectively (ANOVA; p=0.01). This study demonstrates using the ICDAS system in young children is feasible, taking less than 4 minutes for the clinical examination without children behavior/pain self-perception issues.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Comprehensive caries care has shown effectiveness in controlling caries progression and improving health outcomes by controlling caries risk, preventing initial-caries lesions progression, and patient satisfaction. To date, the caries-progression control effectiveness of the patient-centred risk-based CariesCare International (CCI) system, derived from ICCMS™ for the practice (2019), remains unproven. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic a previously planned multi-centre RCT shifted to this “Caries OUT” study, aiming to assess in a single-intervention group in children, the caries-control effectiveness of CCI adapted for the pandemic with non-aerosols generating procedures (non-AGP) and reducing in-office time. Methods In this 1-year multi-centre single-group interventional trial the adapted-CCI effectiveness will be assessed in one single group in terms of tooth-surface level caries progression control, and secondarily, individual-level caries progression control, children’s oral-health behaviour change, parents’ and dentists’ process acceptability, and costs exploration. A sample size of 258 3–5 and 6–8 years old patients was calculated after removing half from the previous RCT, allowing for a 25% dropout, including generally health children (27 per centre). The single-group intervention will be the adapted-CCI 4D-cycle caries care, with non-AGP and reduced in-office appointments’ time. A trained examiner per centre will conduct examinations at baseline, at 5–5.5 months (3 months after basic management), 8.5 and 12 months, assessing the child’s CCI caries risk and oral-health behaviour, visually staging and assessing caries-lesions severity and activity without air-drying (ICDAS-merged Epi); fillings/sealants; missing/dental-sepsis teeth, and tooth symptoms, synthetizing together with parent and external-trained dental practitioner (DP) the patient- and tooth-surface level diagnoses and personalised care plan. DP will deliver the adapted-CCI caries care. Parents’ and dentists’ process acceptability will be assessed via Treatment-Evaluation-Inventory questionnaires, and costs in terms of number of appointments and activities. Twenty-one centres in 13 countries will participate. Discussion The results of Caries OUT adapted for the pandemic will provide clinical data that could help support shifting the caries care in children towards individualised oral-health behaviour improvement and tooth-preserving care, improving health outcomes, and explore if the caries progression can be controlled during the pandemic by conducting non-AGP and reducing in-office time. Trial registration: Retrospectively-registered-ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT04666597-07/12/2020: https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000AGM4&selectaction=Edit&uid=U00019IE&ts=2&cx=uwje3h. Protocol-version 2: 27/01/2021.

No abstract