ArticleBritish dental journal2018
Restorative aspects of oral cancer reconstruction.
Article in British dental journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Different Repair and Reconstruction Methods Combined with Psychological Intervention on Quality of Life and Negative Emotion in Patients with Oral Cancer.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Trial
- Vascularized free flaps based oral reconstruction: a narrative review of dental functional outcomes.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Review
- Article
- Postoperative quality of life and therapy-related impairments of oral cancer in relation to time-distance since treatment.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2022Article
- Photodynamic therapy mediated by nanoparticles Aluminum Chloro Phthalocyanine in oral squamous carcinoma cells.Lasers in medical science · 2022Article
- Pathways for the rehabilitation of resection defects in the maxilla.British dental journal · 2022Article
- Potential application of dental stem cells in regenerative reconstruction of oral and maxillofacial tissues: a narrative review.Frontiers of oral and maxillofacial medicine · 2022Article
- Oral Health Management and Rehabilitation for Patients with Oral Cancer: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Development of a Subjective Symptom Rating Scale for Postoperative Oral Dysfunction in Patients with Oral Cancer: Reliability and Validity of the Postoperative Oral Dysfunction Scale-10.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Oral Rehabilitation of Patients Sustaining Orofacial Injuries: The UPenn Initiative.Advances in dental research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The oral rehabilitation of head and neck cancer patients is a vital and pivotal part of their care pathway, helping to restore function, aesthetics and improve patient well-being and quality of life. Patient-reported outcome data demonstrates that such patients consider that many of their continued and unmet needs relate to their oral and dental rehabilitation. It is therefore incumbent on all dental team members to be aware of the entire spectrum of restorative management options that can be utilised in both the prevention and rehabilitation of this patient cohort. The literature highlights that maxillary and mid-face tumours are challenging, as patients often suffer both profound functional and aesthetic consequences with significant physiological and psychological impact. Conversely, mandibular and floor of mouth tumours often result in issues primarily affecting oral function. This paper will summarise commonly encountered functional and aesthetic issues facing the restorative dental team and highlight widespread preventive challenges.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.