Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34905547›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2021

Noma (cancrum oris): A scoping literature review of a neglected disease (1843 to 2021).

Elise Farley, Ushma Mehta, M Leila Srour, Annick Lenglet

Abstract readHistorical ArticleScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Defining the noma research agenda.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Noma finally recognised as a neglected tropical disease.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Elise FarleyNoma Children's Hospital, Médecins Sans Frontières, Sokoto, Nigeria.ORCID 0000-0003-4457-4068
Ushma MehtaCentre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Research, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-0032-3171
M Leila SrourHealth Frontiers, Vientiane, Laos.ORCID 0000-0003-4706-440X
Annick LengletMédecins Sans Frontières, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNoma (cancrum oris) is an ancient but neglected and poorly understood preventable disease, afflicting the most disenfranchised populations in the world. It is a devastating and often fatal condition that requires urgent and intensive clinical and surgical care, often difficult to access as most cases of noma occur in resource-limited settings. We conducted a scoping review of the literature published on noma to understand the size and scope of available research on the disease and identify research gaps that need to be addressed to evolve our understanding of how to address this disease.

methodsWe searched 11 databases and collected primary peer reviewed articles on noma in all languages, the final search was conducted on 24th August 2021. The oldest manuscript identified was from 28th March 1843 and the most recently published manuscript was from 3rd June 2021. Search terms included cancrum oris and noma. Data was extracted using a standardised data extraction tool and key areas of interest were identified. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic review and Meta-Analyses requirements were followed.

resultsThe review included 147 articles, the majority of the studies (n = 94, 64%) were case reports. Most manuscripts (n = 81, 55%) were published in the 2000s, 49 (33%) were from the 1900s and 17 (12%) from the 1800s. The main areas of interest identified were the history and epidemiology of the disease, noma's clinical progression and aetiology, treatment regimens, mortality rates and the risk factors for the development of noma.

conclusionsNoma has been reported in the literature for hundreds of years; however important gaps in our understanding of the disease remain. Future research should focus on determining the burden and distribution of disease; the true mortality rate, pathogenic cause(s) and the factors that influence prognosis and outcomes after treatment.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualData ManagementHealth ResourcesHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansImmunotherapyNomaRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID34905547
PMCPMC8670680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.