PEDODONTICS & EPIDEMILOGY CHAPTERS Pedodontics & Epidemiology

There is not a ton of complexity as it relates to how this research was completed. Indeed, there was a blend of qualitative and quantitative research in a literature review, compare and contrast format. That being said, care was taken to only use scholarly resources and to generally complete the research in a way that was open, honest, genuine and easy to replicate. In the case of this brief treatise, there is a compare and contrast of two different documents on the same overall subject with an honest discussion about what is being said, how the two reports differ, how they are the same and so on. More detail of that will come in the discussion section. No special methodology beyond a compare and contrast of the relevant and available literature is employed. Note that any references or conclusions drawn are from the proposal and literature review and absolutely no other external sources are used.

Discussion

One major difference between the larger and smaller documents is that they do indeed cover two main angles of the same problem. They do focus on roughly the same thing in that they both point to the alarming rates of gingivitis and other gum diseases. An issue with both reports is that the literature review singles out India but both the documents are using a clinic in the United Arab Emirates as a reference point. While those two areas are not too far apart, they are not remotely the same area and thus cannot really be compared side-by-side. However, the literature review (the longer document) is adept at taking snapshots of a lot of different things and from a lot of different areas.

The two papers focus on rates of gum/jaw dysfunction and disorder and they point to very different situations. For example, page 7 of the literature review points to the United States which has very low rates of advanced periodontitis. Indeed, the United States only sees 0.6% of its subjects aged 13-15 with "perpetual" iterations of the disorder. On the other hand, the overview document points to India having 84% of children with gingivitis, more than a third with malocclusion and another third overall having fluorosis. As for remedies to this problem, treatment is pointed to in both works but there is some variance. For example, the overview document points to things such as awareness, the offering of free or low-cost checkups and so forth. The literature document is much more thorough and much more robust as it points to basic things such as drinking water, dental care as a social well-being issue, and so forth. However, specific treatments are much less talked about in the literature review than the overall scope of the problem, its overall causes and...

However, cleanliness (or lack thereof) is mentioned more than once in the literature review document.
However, the two documents are two cogs in the same machine. The proposal document points to what will be done, what the main issue is and what is being measured. The literature review is more of a high-level overview of work that was done by other people. Indeed, the two documents are both addressing the same issue but the source and scope of the work is different in each report. Indeed, it is clear that both in the UAE as well as the poorer areas of India that economic challenge and poor teeth and/or gum health often coincide. Both pieces of work lay bare that while bad habits and choices are what they are, there is not much that can be done when the water is nasty and the resources are limited. Indeed, when children in the United States are having bad gum rates at least than a single percentage points and it's anywhere from a third to nearly nine out of ten in India, it is clear that wealth and resources matter a great deal.

Further, both works make it clear, so as to dovetail with the above, that while all the fillings and other dental procedures in the world might help, it is better to solve the issues that are leading to the exorbitantly higher gum/teeth issue rates in India and UAE and the source of any other people that come to the Ajman clinic. For example, the pervasive nature of microorganisms in areas of the UAE and India are simply not present in the United States and in other developed countries because the removal of waste, the sewer system in general and drinking water are in good shape in that country. On the other hand, someone that is not among cleanliness and order, by comparison, is much more likely to have a mouth full of organisms that create or exacerbate the tooth and gum issues that tend to come with the higher presence of those sorts of organism. Indeed, people in the United States may take mouthwash for granted. However, a child in India having a simple toothbrush or even being able to rinse and sanitize that toothbrush may be an issue.

Something else that has to be said is that simple awareness of the problem, even when it's rendered with the people on the street, is not going to mean nearly as much as the governments and people with resources helping repair and change the facts on the ground. Indeed, a child in Ajman city may desire cleaning drinking water and it would no doubt help their plight. However, that child (or even most adults) would not have the means to actually effect change and would either need to adapt some other way or move to an area that is cleaner and has better dental care. However, the latter statement presumes that the person is remotely mobile and has…