Jessica Klöckner Knorst
Mario Vianna Vettore
Thiago Machado Ardenghi- 1Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil
- 2Department of Health and Nursing Sciences, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway
Social capital has been widely inserted in health discussions in recent decades. In this sense, social capital has become a popular term and has been highlighted as one of the main determinants of health in the conceptual framework of the social determinants of the World Health Organization. The concept of social capital focuses on the positive consequences of sociability and places these consequences in the broader discussion of capital. In this sense, social capital reflects the benefits that individuals and communities derive from having broad social networks or high levels of social trust. Despite controversies regarding its definition and numerous criticisms, a growing body of evidence suggests that high levels of social capital benefit oral health. This factor has also been recognized as a potential softener of the impact of oral conditions on oral health, through behavioural and psychosocial processes. Thus, efforts to reduce inequities in oral health preferably should be based on their origins and on their complex causal process, such as the social determinants. The future challenges in the area are specially related to the development of interventions and health promotion actions that aim to stimulate social capital, aiming to reduce the impact of social inequalities on oral health throughout the life course.
Background
It is increasingly recognized that oral diseases are determined by several biological, psychological, behavioural, social, environmental, and political factors. In this context, a growing body of evidence has explored broader factors that influence oral health outcomes more distally. Among these factors is social capital, which has been highlighted as one of the main social determinants of health. Despite controversies regarding its definition and numerous criticisms regarding its dark side, previous literature has suggested the positive influence of social capital on health outcomes. In our perspective, the concept of social capital focuses on the positive consequences of sociability and places these consequences in the broader discussion of capital. Thus, social capital can be defined as social resources accessed by individuals with good social networks or living in socially structured communities, which generate returns and benefits for themselves or the whole. Notwithstanding, to understand the divergences in the literature and the existing gaps, a deep review of the historical and theoretical aspects surrounding the concept remained necessary, as well as the current contribution of social capital research in health outcomes.
A historical introduction: Reviewing concepts and definitions
Social capital came into evidence in scientific research, mainly by Pierre Bordieu (1986), James Coleman (1988) and Robert Putnam (1993); however, there is still no consensus on its definition (1–3). For some authors, social capital has been described as the characteristics of the social structure (such as civic participation, levels of trust and reciprocity) that act as resources accessed by individuals and that may facilitate collective actions (2, 3). Social capital has also been defined as a resource accessible to individuals through participation in diverse types of social networks, enabling the achievement of certain goals, returns, or benefits that not be accomplished in the absence of this “characteristic capital” (2–4).
In recent decades, the concepts and applications of social capital have spread to different research areas. However, its theoretical development and this migration from sociology to other disciplines contributed to the divergence of concepts and several classifications of social capital. Some researchers have suggested that social capital has two dimensions: structural and cognitive (5, 6); the structural component is the quantitative side of social capital, which refers to the extent and intensity of participation in associations or other forms of social activity; and the cognitive component is the qualitative side, referring to people's perception of interpersonal trust, solidarity, and reciprocity (5, 6). The perceived trust may also be divided into thick (deep and lasting ties) and thin (superficial and infrequent ties) (7).
Another relevant definition related to social capital are the distinction among bonding, bridging and linking of social capital (8). The “bonding” social capital refers to relationships among members from a network of similar individuals, such as the connection with family members and friends. The “bridging” social capital is related to the ties that connected broader networks, such as individuals from different communities. These two concepts have also been defined as egalitarian or “horizontal” relationships. Finally, “linking” social capital refers to the relationships among individuals or groups in different positions of influence in society, which also is defined as hierarchical or “vertical” relationships (8).
Whether social capital is an individual or collective resource is still discussed. Kawachi, Subramanian and Kim (2008) defined social capital as an individual and collective attribute. In this logic, social capital resides in social structures, such as neighbourhoods and work environments, as well as in the sources that people access through their social networks (9).
Aiming to organize the different dimensions and levels of social capital, Rostila (2011) developed a theoretical model that includes the multiple faces of social capital (4). In this model, social capital comprises three fundamental components: social networks, social trust, and social resources. However, the first two components—social networks and trust—are considered preconditions for forming the third—social resources. Thus, social capital can be defined as the social resources that evolve from accessible social networks or social structures characterized by mutual trust, which facilitate access to different returns that can benefit the individual and communities (4).
Due to this exposed complexity around its construct, there is still no unmitigated method to measure social capital. Moreover, one might argue that social capital cannot be measured directly, but it can be inferred from its determinants or manifestations (1–4). The determinants are factors that influence social interactions, which allows social capital formation. On the other hand, manifestations are the results of social capital, such as perceived social support. Therefore, social capital is commonly measured through indicators or “proxies”, which are theoretically linked to the concept, both at an individual and community level (4).
Commonly used individual indicators of social capital refer to social participation, such as participation in organizations, political action and civic involvement (10, 11); social support and social networks, such as contact with friends and family, support systems, participation in religious activities and the depth of the relationships (12–14); and social trust, referring to the levels of trust and reciprocity in society and institutions in general (10). Community-level social capital has also been assessed. Some studies used indicators of community social networks, such as the number of formal entities in the community (association of workers, volunteers and community cultural centres) (13, 15, 16). Community social capital has also been evaluated through the number of participants in administrative assemblies, the number of homicides and volunteering (17, 18). Some questionnaires have also been developed to measure social capital or its dimensions (19).
The above-mentioned controversies suggest that there is a divergence and numerous ways to measure social capital. For this reason, most researchers remain using indicators, which generates criticism, since social capital is a multidimensional concept that is hardly completely measured with few variables. However, the use of indicators may be suitable in terms of public health, since it highlights the exact points of action for promoting health. In this context, social capital has been explored in different ways within health research.
Social capital and health
The concept of social capital has been widely inserted in health discussions in recent decades (20). The “paradigm shifts” in health has suggested that the social environment has a significant effect on individuals’ health (21, 22). Social capital has become a popular term highlighted as one of the main determinants of health in the conceptual framework proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) (23). Despite controversies and criticisms regarding its definition (24), a growing body of evidence suggests that high levels of social capital benefit health (20, 25).
Previous studies suggested that high levels of social capital are related to lower mortality rates, lower occurrence of chronic diseases, as well as lower rates of depression and suicide (26–29). It has also been demonstrated that high levels of social capital are associated with better mental health, better self-perception of health and better quality of life (27, 30). In addition, different aspects of health, including oral health, have also been explored in social capital literature.
Social capital and oral health
Social capital has been associated with different normative and subjective oral health outcomes. Since different oral diseases are still considered a public health problem worldwide (31, 32), the factors that lead to the decline of oral health still need to be explored. Furthermore, currently and based on the contemporary definitions of health (33), oral health emerges as a positive concept that highlights the personal and social resources available to individuals, such as social capital.
Some studies evaluated the association between social capital and dental caries. Most studies showed that the higher level of individual social capital, the lower dental caries experience in children (34), adolescents (35), and adults (36). The same pattern has been observed regarding community social capital (37), where dental caries rates were significantly lower in areas with higher levels of empowerment. A 10-year follow-up cohort study also demonstrated that the high level of community social capital in early childhood directly impacted the lower incidence of dental caries in adolescence (38). This association was also mediated by behavioural and psychosocial variables (38).
Considering periodontal conditions, previous studies showed that high levels of social capital at the individual and community levels are related to less gingival bleeding in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (14, 39, 40). Furthermore, a cross-sectional study involving Israeli adults demonstrated that religiosity led to greater social support through spirituality, which was related to lower levels of periodontitis (41).
A cross-sectional study performed on adults showed that low social capital was also associated with lower masticatory capacity (42). There is also evidenced on the positive association between individual- and community-level social capital and the number of natural teeth (43, 44). In addition, greater tooth loss over time (45) and more edentulism (46) have been related to lower levels of social capital.
Considering subjective outcomes, some previous studies evaluated the association between social capital and self-rated oral health (SROH), showing that the higher level of individual social capital, the better SROH in children (47), adolescents (48), and adults (45, 46). The same pattern has been observed regarding community social capital (47, 49), where SROH was significantly better in areas with higher levels of social capital. However, the social capital measured through high informal social control was related to poorer SROH in adolescents (49).
A positive relationship was also observed between high levels of social capital and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). Previous literature showed that higher levels of social capital at individual and neighbourhood levels positively impacted on children's OHRQoL in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (16, 38, 50). A positive association between high levels of social support and OHRQoL was also reported in adults (46). Furthermore, some studies have indicated an indirect influence of social capital on OHRQoL via dental status (48), stress (51) and sense of coherence (SOC) (38).
A recently systematic review evaluated the relationship between social capital and oral health in children and adolescents through 21 studies meta-analysed, totalling 81,241 individuals (52). It was demonstrated that community and individual social capital were positively related to oral health outcomes, such as dental caries, gingival bleeding, SROH and OHRQoL in children and adolescents. In general, community level social capital exerted more impact on oral health that individual social capital, and the subjective oral health outcomes were more affected (52). Systematic reviews with pooled measures of social capital and oral health in adults and the elderly have not been explored yet.
In this context, research on social capital and oral health have been conducted over the last two decades. However, in addition to exploring the association between social capital and oral health, testing interventions focused on oral health promotion are also relevant in terms of public health.
Social capital and oral health promotion
Intervention studies focusing on health promotion through social capital remain scarce in previous literature. Considering general health, some intervention studies to promote social capital have been proposed (53–58).
A pragmatic randomized clinical trial involving older adults proposing a complex intervention to promote social capital, self-management, and health literacy showed positive effects on mental health and health promotion (55). Furthermore, the local governments and researchers in the Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study (JAGES) have conducted a community-based intervention program to enhance social capital and health. This intervention introduced community salons that proposed several activities to promote social networks and social participation. This program reduced the risk of poor self-rated health (SRH) (57) and cognitive decline (58).
A previous systematic review showed that social capital interventions improved mixed effects on general quality of life, well-being and SRH (53). In addition, another systematic review demonstrated that the majority of interventions in social capital are focused only on the individual level (54), not incorporating the environmental context where people are embedded. Finally, Flores et al., 2018 suggest the need for further high-quality trials, especially among vulnerable populations to assess the sustainability of the effect of social capital interventions (56).
To the best of our knowledge, there is no previous study assessing the effects of interventions on social capital and their impact on oral health promotion. However, a previous cluster-randomized trial demonstrated that a school-based intervention focusing on changes to enhance children's SOC improved their OHRQoL (59). In this sense, since previous studies have shown that SOC may interact with the coping and social capital of the individuals (60), interventions considering the interaction among these psychosocial factors seem promising to improve oral health.
Future challenges and directions
Future research on social capital and oral health conditions has many challenges ahead. Additionally, different aspects of this relationship still need to be explored more deeply.
First, an important aspect to be considered is how social capital should be measured. The literature still lacks valid and standardized questionnaires that allow of global comparisons. Divergences in the conceptual of social capital and the consequent difficulties in measuring such complex construct may explain this methodological gap. Nevertheless, it is necessary to reflect on the paradigm shift about how friendship and social support networks are developed and sustained between people in the digital “era”. Thus, it is reasonable to rethink new possibilities for measuring social capital beyond traditional measures, also considering the interactions obtained through online social networks. Although some questionnaires have been suggested for this purpose (61), studies in oral health research that considers social capital in this way remained scarce in previous literature. Future studies considering social capital in digital environment may be important for planning future interventions and oral health promotion.
It is important to emphasize the scarcity of qualitative studies exploring the relationship between social capital and oral health outcomes. The use of mixed methods may be promising to enhance the knowledge in this topic, as well as for strengthening public health strategies to tackle social determinants. The use of these methods may also be useful for a better understanding of individuals’ perceptions of their social networks and social support. It should be noted that intervention studies involving community social capital are also scarce and are strongly encouraged, especially in oral health. Mapping mobilization of social capital in neighbourhoods may be one way of achieving community action for health promotion.
Another important factor to consider is the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic scenario on the social capital sources and on perceived social trust, which may impact individuals’ oral health. Previous studies have investigated social capital in a post-disaster context (62). Thus, this aspect still needs to be further explored in oral health promotion. Some studies have reported the role of social capital as a mediator between adverse conditions, such as low income and negative life events, and health outcomes (63). Moreover, further investigation of how social capital may interact with other factors and consequently impact oral health is also necessary.
Considering the current scenario, further research is needed to provide more in-depth knowledge on how social capital may affect oral health outcomes. Future challenges and directions in this area are specially related to the development of interventions and health promotion actions to stimulate social capital, aiming to reduce the impact of social inequalities on oral health throughout the life course.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.
Author contributions
JK conceived and wrote this commentary. MV and TA conceived and critically revised this commentary. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Funding
This study was funded by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq—process 161233/2021-0) and by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brasil (CAPES)—Finance Code 001.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Bourdieu P. The forms of capital. In: Richardson JG, editors. Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press (1986). p. 241–58.
2. Coleman JS. Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am J Sociol. (1988) 94:S95–S120. doi: 10.1086/228943
3. Putnam RD. Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press (1993).
4. Rostila M. The facets of social capital. J Theory Soc Behav. (2011) 41(3):308–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5914.2010.00454.x
5. Krishna A, Shrader E. Social capital assessment tool. In: Conference on social capital and poverty reduction. Washington, DC: World Bank (1999).
6. Harpham T, Grant E, Thomas E. Measuring social capital within health surveys: key issues. Health Policy Plan. (2002) 17(1):106–11. doi: 10.1093/heapol/17.1.106
7. Putnam RD. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, USA: Simon and Schuster (2000). 541 p.
8. Szreter S, Woolcock M. Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health. Int J Epidemiol. (2004) 33(4):650–67. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyh013
9. Kawachi I, Subramania SV, Kim D. Social capital and health: a decade of progress and beyond. In: Kawachi I, Subramanian SV, Kim D, editors. Social capital and health. 1st ed. New York: Springer (2008). p. 1–26.
10. Aida J, Kondo K, Kondo N, Watt RG, Sheiham A, Tsakos G. Income inequality, social capital and self-rated health and dental status in older Japanese. Soc Sci Med. (2011) 73(10):1561–8. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.09.005
11. Lamarca GA, do C Leal M, Sheiham A, Vettore MV. The association of neighbourhood and individual social capital with consistent self-rated health: a longitudinal study in Brazilian pregnant and postpartum women. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. (2013) 13:1. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-1
12. Hyyppä MT, Mäki J. Why do Swedish-speaking Finns have longer active life? An area for social capital research. Health Promot Int. (2001) 16(1):55–64. doi: 10.1093/heapro/16.1.55
13. Guedes RS, Piovesan C, Antunes JL, Mendes FM, Ardenghi TM. Assessing individual and neighborhood social factors in child oral health-related quality of life: a multilevel analysis. Qual Life Res. (2014) 23(9):2521–30. doi: 10.1007/s11136-014-0690-z
14. Tomazoni F, Vettore MV, Zanatta FB, Tuchtenhagen S, Moreira CH, Ardenghi TM. The associations of socioeconomic status and social capital with gingival bleeding among schoolchildren. J Public Health Dent. (2017) 7(1):21–9. doi: 10.1111/jphd.12166
15. Aida J, Ando Y, Oosaka M, Niimi K, Morita M. Contributions of social context to inequality in dental caries: a multilevel analysis of Japanese 3-year-old children. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2008) 36(2):149–56. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00380.x
16. Knorst JK, Menegazzo GR, Emmanuelli B, Mendes FM, Ardenghi TM. Effect of neighborhood and individual social capital in early childhood on oral health-related quality of life: a 7-year cohort study. Qual Life Res. (2019) 28(7):1773–82. doi: 10.1007/s11136-019-02138-4
17. Pattussi MP, Marcenes W, Croucher R, Sheiham A. Social deprivation, income inequality, social cohesion and dental caries in Brazilian school children. Soc Sci Med. (2001) 53(7):915–25. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00391-9
18. Aida J, Kuriyama S, Ohmori-Matsuda K, Hozawa A, Osaka K, Tsuji I. The association between neighborhood social capital and self-reported dentate status in elderly Japanese–the ohsaki cohort 2006 study. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2011) 39(3):239–49. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2010.00590.x
19. Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL. The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med. (1991) 32(6):705–14. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90150-b
20. Moore S, Kawachi I. Twenty years of social capital and health research: a glossary. J Epidemiol Community Health. (2017) 71(5):513–7. doi: 10.1136/jech-2016-208313
21. Watt RG. From victim blaming to upstream action: tackling the social determinants of oral health inequalities. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2007) 35(1):1–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00348.x
22. Sisson KL. Theoretical explanations for social inequalities in oral health. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2007) 35(2):81–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00354.x
23. Solar O, Irwin A. A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Document Production Services (2010).
24. Villalonga-Olives E, Kawachi I. The dark side of social capital: a systematic review of the negative health effects of social capital. Soc Sci Med. (2017) 194:105–27. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.10.020
25. Rouxel PL, Heilmann A, Aida J, Tsakos G, Watt RG. Social capital: theory, evidence, and implications for oral health. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2015) 43(2):97–105. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12141
26. Diez Roux AV, Merkin SS, Arnett D, Chambless L, Massing M, Nieto FJ, et al. Neighborhood of residence and incidence of coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med. (2001) 345(2):99–106. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200107123450205
27. Gilbert KL, Quinn SC, Goodman RM, Butler J, Wallace J. A meta-analysis of social capital and health: a case for needed research. J Health Psychol. (2013) 18(11):1385–99. doi: 10.1177/1359105311435983
28. Smith ND, Kawachi I. State-level social capital and suicide mortality in the 50 U. S. States. Soc Sci Med. (2014) 120:269–77. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.09.007
29. Watanabe R, Kondo K, Saito T, Tsuji T, Hayashi T, Ikeda T, et al. Change in municipality-level health-related social capital and depressive symptoms: ecological and 5-year repeated cross-sectional study from the JAGES. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2019) 16(11):2038. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16112038
30. Hassanzadeh J, Asadi-Lari M, Baghbanian A, Ghaem H, Kassani A, Rezaianzadeh A. Association between social capital, health-related quality of life, and mental health: a structural-equation modeling approach. Croat Med J. (2016) 57(1):58–65. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2016.57.58
31. Listl S, Galloway J, Mossey PA, Marcenes W. Global economic impact of dental diseases. J Dent Res. (2015) 94(10):1355–61. doi: 10.1177/0022034515602879
32. Peres MA, Macpherson LMD, Weyant RJ, Daly B, Venturelli R, Mathur MR, et al. Oral diseases: a global public health challenge. Lancet. (2019) 394(10194):249–60. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31146-8
33. Glick M, Williams DM, Kleinman DV, Vujicic M, Watt RG, Weyant RJ. A new definition for oral health developed by the FDI world dental federation opens the door to a universal definition of oral health. Int Dent J. (2016) 66(6):322–4. doi: 10.1111/idj.12294
34. Duijster D, van Loveren C, Dusseldorp E, Verrips GH. Modelling community, family, and individual determinants of childhood dental caries. Eur J Oral Sci. (2014) 122(2):125–33. doi: 10.1111/eos.12118
35. Fontanini H, Marshman Z, Vettore M. Social support and social network as intermediary social determinants of dental caries in adolescents. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2015) 43(2):172–82. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12139
36. Nogueira JS, Pereira AC, Frias AC, Ambrosano GMB, Cortellazzi KL, Guerra LM, et al. Social capital and factors associated with the caries experience in adults - a population-based study in Brazil. Braz Oral Res. (2019) 33:e118. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2019.vol33.0118
37. Santiago BM, Valença AM, Vettore MV. The relationship between neighborhood empowerment and dental caries experience: a multilevel study in adolescents and adults. Rev Bras Epidemiol. (2014) 17(2):15–28. doi: 10.1590/1809-4503201400060002
38. Knorst JK, Brondani B, Vettore MV, Hesse D, Mendes FM, Ardenghi TM. Pathways between social capital and oral health from childhood to adolescence. J Dent Res. (2022) 101(10):1155–64. doi: 10.1177/00220345221094510
39. Sfreddo CS, Moreira CHC, Celeste RK, Nicolau B, Ardenghi TM. Pathways of socioeconomic inequalities in gingival bleeding among adolescents. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2019) 47(2):177–84. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12441
40. Ferreira DM, Knorst JK, Menegazzo GR, Bolsson GB, Ardenghi TM. Effect of individual and neighborhood social capital on gingival bleeding in children: a 7-year cohort study. J Periodontol. (2021) 92(10):1430–40. doi: 10.1002/JPER.20-0010
41. Zini A, Sgan-Cohen HD, Marcenes W. Is religiosity related to periodontal health among the adult Jewish population in Jerusalem? J Periodontal Res. (2012) 47(4):418–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0765.2011.01447.x
42. Kim EK, Jung YS, Kim KH, Kim KR, Kwon GH, Choi YH, et al. Social capital and oral health: the association of social capital with edentulism and chewing ability in the rural elderly. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. (2018) 74:100–5. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2017.10.002
43. Aida J, Hanibuchi T, Nakade M, Hirai H, Osaka K, Kondo K. The different effects of vertical social capital and horizontal social capital on dental status: a multilevel analysis. Soc Sci Med. (2009) 69(4):512–8. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.06.003
44. Koyama S, Aida J, Saito M, Kondo N, Sato Y, Matsuyama Y, et al. Community social capital and tooth loss in Japanese older people: a longitudinal cohort study. BMJ Open. (2016) 6(4):e010768. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010768
45. Vettore MV, Faerstein E, Baker SR. Social position, social ties and adult's oral health: 13 year cohort study. J Dent. (2016) 44:50–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.12.004
46. Rouxel P, Tsakos G, Demakakos P, Zaninotto P, Watt RG. Social capital and oral health among adults 50 years and older: results from the English longitudinal study of ageing. Psychosom Med. (2015) 77(8):927–37. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000197
47. Reynolds JC, Damiano PC, Glanville JL, Oleson J, McQuistan MR. Neighborhood and family social capital and parent-reported oral health of children in Iowa. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2015) 43(6):569–77. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12182
48. Vettore MV, Ahmad SFH, Machuca C, Fontanini H. Socio-economic status, social support, social network, dental status, and oral health reported outcomes in adolescents. Eur J Oral Sci. (2019) 127(2):139–46. doi: 10.1111/eos.12605
49. Furuta M, Ekuni D, Takao S, Suzuki E, Morita M, Kawachi I. Social capital and self-rated oral health among young people. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2012) 40(2):97–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2011.00642.x
50. Knorst JK, Vettore MV, Brondani B, Emmanuelli B, Paiva SM, Ardenghi TM. Impact of community and individual social capital during early childhood on oral health-related quality of life: a 10-year prospective cohort study. J Dent. (2022) 126:104281. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104281
51. Gupta E, Robinson PG, Marya CM, Baker SR. Oral health inequalities: relationships between environmental and individual factors. J Dent Res. (2015) 94(10):1362–8. doi: 10.1177/0022034515592880
52. Knorst JK, Tomazoni F, Sfreddo CS, Vettore MV, Hesse D, Ardenghi TM. Social capital and oral health in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. (2021) 50(6):461–8. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12714
53. Coll-Planas L, Nyqvist F, Puig T, Urrútia G, Solà I, Monteserín R. Social capital interventions targeting older people and their impact on health: a systematic review. J Epidemiol Community Health. (2017) 71(7):663–72. doi: 10.1136/jech-2016-208131
54. Villalonga-Olives E, Wind TR, Kawachi I. Social capital interventions in public health: a systematic review. Soc Sci Med. (2018) 212:203–18. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.07.022
55. Blancafort Alias S, Monteserín Nadal R, Moral I, Roqué Fígols M, Rojano I Luque X, Coll-Planas L. Promoting social capital, self-management and health literacy in older adults through a group-based intervention delivered in low-income urban areas: results of the randomized trial AEQUALIS. BMC Public Health. (2021) 21(1):84. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-10094-9
56. Flores EC, Fuhr DC, Bayer AM, Lescano AG, Thorogood N, Simms V. Mental health impact of social capital interventions: a systematic review. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. (2018) 53(2):107–19. doi: 10.1007/s00127-017-1469-7
57. Ichida Y, Hirai H, Kondo K, Kawachi I, Takeda T, Endo H. Does social participation improve self-rated health in the older population? A quasi-experimental intervention study. Soc Sci Med. (2013) 94:83–90. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.05.006
58. Hikichi H, Kondo K, Takeda T, Kawachi I. Social interaction and cognitive decline: results of a 7-year community intervention. Alzheimers Dement. (2016) 3(1):23–32. doi: 10.1016/j.trci.2016.11.003
59. Tomazoni F, Vettore MV, Baker SR, Ardenghi TM. Can a school-based intervention improve the oral health-related quality of life of Brazilian children? JDR Clin Trans Res. (2019) 4(3):229–38. doi: 10.1177/2380084418816984
60. Knorst JK, Vettore MV, Brondani B, Emmanuelli B, Tomazoni F, Ardenghi TM. Sense of coherence moderates the relationship between social capital and oral health related quality of life in schoolchildren: a 10-year cohort study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. (2022) 20(1):56. doi: 10.1186/s12955-022-01965-3
61. Jeong SW, Ha S, Lee K. How to measure social capital in an online brand community? A comparison of three social capital scales. J Bus Res. (2021) 131:652–63. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.07.051
62. Hikichi H, Aida J, Matsuyama Y, Tsuboya T, Kondo K, Kawachi I. Community-level social capital and cognitive decline after a natural disaster: a natural experiment from the 2011 great east Japan earthquake and tsunami. Soc Sci Med. (2020) 257:111981. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.09.057
Keywords: health promotion, oral health, social capital, social networks, social support
Citation: Knorst JK, Vettore MV and Ardenghi TM (2022) Social capital and oral health promotion: Past, present, and future challenges. Front. Oral. Health 3:1075576. doi: 10.3389/froh.2022.1075576
Received: 20 October 2022; Accepted: 14 November 2022;
Published: 25 November 2022.
Edited by:
Fawad Javed, University of Rochester Medical Center, United StatesReviewed by:
Bathsheba Turton, Boston University, United States© 2022 Knorst, Vettore and Ardenghi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Mario Vianna Vettore bWFyaW8udmV0dG9yZUB1aWEubm8=
Specialty Section: This article was submitted to Oral Health Promotion, a section of the journal Frontiers in Oral Health