Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30651697›Full record

ArticleJournal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP

Comparative efficacy of chemiluminescence and toluidine blue in the detection of potentially malignant and malignant disorders of the oral cavity.

Abhilasha Shukla, Narendra Nath Singh, Sangeeta Adsul, Sulabh Kumar, Deepika Shukla, Anubhuti Sood

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Abhilasha ShuklaDepartment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Babu Banarasi Das College of Dental Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Narendra Nath SinghDepartment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Kothiwal Dental College & Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Sangeeta AdsulDepartment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Kothiwal Dental College & Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Sulabh KumarDepartment of Prosthodontics, Babu Banarasi Das College of Dental Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Deepika ShuklaDepartment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Centre for Dental Education and Research, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Anubhuti SoodDepartment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Centre for Dental Education and Research, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Babu Banarasi Das University · INAll India Institute of Medical Sciences · INKothiwal Dental College and Research Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextEarly detection of oral cancer is of paramount importance in determining the prognosis of oral cancer. Literature suggests that several diagnostic modalities have been proposed to aid a clinician in early detection of oral cancer without much conclusive evidence.

aimsThe present study aims to compare toluidine blue and chemiluminescence screening methods in early detection of carcinoma in North Indian population and also to evaluate these methods with histopathological diagnosis.

methodsIn this prospective study, 42 patients with clinically visible premalignant lesions were included. Demographic data were collected, and suspicious lesions were examined by chemiluminescence light (Vizilite) and followed by local application of toluidine blue (Mashberg's recommendation). Findings were recorded for each lesion under standard incandescent light as positive or negative. Biopsy and histopathological analysis of the tissues were performed. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values for the chemiluminescence technique and toluidine blue were calculated for diagnostic tests. RESULTS AND

conclusionsIn the present study, toluidine blue test was found to be moderately sensitive (63.33%) whereas chemiluminescence test (Vizilite) was found to be highly sensitive (90%); however, the test has limited specificity (50%). Thus, the study concluded that both toluidine blue and Vizilite can be used as an adjunct to simple, conventional visual examination and in screening procedure for oral potentially malignant disorders.

Indexed as

Chemiluminescencesensitivityspecificitytoluidine blue

Identifiers

PMID30651697
PMCPMC6306576
OpenAlexW2911747270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.