## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l r r} \hline  & **Not in Good Dental** & **In Good Dental** \\  & **Condition (N = 563)** & **Condition (N = 705)** \\ \hline Years of education (mean \(\pm\) Standard deviation) ** & 8.3 \(\pm\) 4.9 & 9.4 \(\pm\) 5.1 \\ \hline General health score (units) ** & 56.7 \(\pm\) 24.2 & 69.7 \(\pm\) 20.6 \\ \hline Mental health score (units) ** & 55.7 \(\pm\) 22 & 65.3 \(\pm\) 20 \\ \hline Age (years) (median (interquartile range)) ** & 32 (25–41) & 28 (23–37) \\ \hline DMS scale (units) ** & 1.3 (1–2.6) & 1 (1–2) \\ \hline Males (\%) & 60.4 & 65.1 \\ \hline Marital status (\%) * & & \\ \hline Single & 42.0 & 50.1 \\ Engaged/married & 48.8 & 41.8 \\ Separated & 4.6 & 3.8 \\ Widowed & 4.6 & 4.3 \\ \hline Have at least one child (\%) ** & 59.9 & 42.7 \\ \hline Possession of any kind of permission (asylum or other kind) (\%) * & 62.4 & 69.6 \\ \hline I know where to go when I need a dentist (\%) * & 67.1 & 73.1 \\ \hline Country of origin (\%) * & & \\ \hline Afghanistan & 16.1 & 13.1 \\ Iraq & 7.5 & 10.1 \\ Nigeria & 7.1 & 10.7 \\ Syria & 20.5 & 22.7 \\ Other & 48.8 & 43.3 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Descriptive characteristics and other variables by dental/teeth condition. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the effect of demographic characteristics, quality of life, sense of discrimination and presence of any kind of permission on dental health (Table 5). Two different logistic regression models, one with general health and one with mental health due to collinearity, were used ([PERSON]'s r = 0.55; \(p\) < 0.001). Higher educational level indicated significantly higher odds of having good dental conditions in both models (Model 1: OR = 1.072; 95%CI (1.028, 1.118); Model 2: OR = 1.075; 95%CI (1.032, 1.120)). Similar positive correlations to good dental condition were observed for general and mental health, having any kind of permission to stay, and not having any children. Migrants with higher age and DMS score had lower odds of having good dental conditions (for age: Model 1: OR = 0.948; 95%CI (0.928, 0.969); Model 2: OR = 0.947; 95%CI (0.927, 0.968), for DMS score: Model 1: OR = 0.786; 95%CI (0.605, 1.021); Model 2: OR = 0.760; 95%CI (0.586, 0.986)). Widowed migrants had approximately 5 times higher odds of having good dental conditions compared with single migrants (Model 1: OR = 5.338; 95%CI (2.016, 14.136); Model 2: OR = 4.387; 95%CI (1.689, 11.391)). In our sample, migrants who never had visited the dentist reported higher odds of having good dental conditions compared with migrants who had visited the dentist <1 year ago (Model 1: OR = 0.400; 95%CI (0.211, 0.758); Model 2: OR = 0.436; 95%CI (0.231, 0.821)) or had visited the dentist >1 year ago (Model 1: OR = 0.294; 95%CI (0.153, 0.565); Model 2: OR = 0.322; 95%CI (0.169, 0.613)). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l r r} \hline \hline  & **Ods Ratio** & **(95\% Confidence Interval)** \\ \hline
**Model 1** & & \\ \hline Education (years) & 1.072 *** & (1.028, 1.118) \\ General health (score) & 1.020 *** & (1.010, 1.029) \\ Age (years) & 0.948 *** & (0.928, 0.969) \\ Discrimination Scale (score) & 0.786 * & (0.605, 1.021) \\ Gender (females) & 1.134 & (0.732, 1.758) \\ Marital status \({}^{+}\) & & \\ Engaged/married/living with partner & 1.531 & (0.892, 2.628) \\ Separated/divorced & 1.531 & (0.570, 4.108) \\ Widowed & 5.338 *** & (2.016, 14.136) \\ No possession of any kind of permission & 0.631 ** & (0.408, 0.978) \\ Have no children & 1.959 ** & (1.221, 3.143) \\ Last visit to the dentist \({}^{++}\) & & \\ <1 year & 0.400 ** & (0.211, 0.758) \\ >1 year & 0.294 *** & (0.153, 0.565) \\ \hline
**Model 2** & & \\ \hline Education (years) & 1.075 *** & (1.032, 1.120) \\ Mental health (score) & 1.014 ** & (1.004, 1.023) \\ Age (years) & 0.947 *** & (0.927, 0.968) \\ Discrimination Scale (score) & 0.760 ** & (0.586, 0.986) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}