{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03801765105227427, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026476578411405296, 'mean_word_length': 5.040983606557377, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Prevalence of edentulism among adults with intellectual disabilities: A narrative review informed by systematic review principles.

AIM
This review reports the prevalence of edentulism among adults with intellectual disabilities (IDs) in the literature.


METHODS
A systematic search strategy led to the screening of 1,089 titles and abstracts from PubMed and six additional articles. Inclusion criteria were applied. An estimate of the prevalence of edentulism was calculated.


RESULTS
Nineteen studies (from 20 publications) met inclusion criteria: eighteen were cross-sectional surveys. Sample sizes ranged from 50 to 9,620 (n = 23,853). Samples were heterogeneous, with four studies drawing from Special Olympics Special Smiles (n = 14,862); nine from institutions (n = 2,447); five from disability registers (n = 1,812) and one patient cohort (n = 4,732). By pooling the participants of all the studies reviewed, 6.6% of people with IDs were found to be edentulous. This is similar to the general population. This conceals the fact that the prevalence of edentulism varied greatly across studies (0-50%), by age and across sampling techniques adopted.


CONCLUSIONS
Much like for the general population, edentulism should be seen as a key measure of disease experience and management. Such focus is needed to reduce the prevalence of edentulism for people with IDs globally. This can only be measured by adopting representative samples, which include people with IDs.