ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2022
Comparison of oral human papilloma virus detection methods among Hispanic adults.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Detection and natural history of HPV infection of oral cavity and tonsils - a systematic literature review.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Persistent Oral High-Risk HPV Detection: A Narrative Review of Longitudinal Assessment, Diagnostic Evaluation, and Surveillance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Distribution of High-Risk HPV in Cervical Versus Oropharyngeal Samples: Results from a Prospective Screening Study in a Cohort of European Women of Reproductive Age.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Prevalence, Screening, and Parental Awareness of Oral Human Papillomavirus in Pediatric Populations (HOPE Project): Findings from a Cross-Sectional Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) Detection in Oral Rinse vs. Oral Sponge: A Preliminary Accuracy Report in Oral Cancer Patients.Cancers · 2024Article
- Comparison of oral human papilloma virus detection methods among Hispanic adults.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesOral human papilloma virus (HPV) infection is associated with nearly three-quarters of all oropharyngeal cancers in the United States. Research also suggests its association with periodontal disease. There are limited studies evaluating differences in HPV detection methods; however, oral rinse is considered the most sensitive detection method. We compared HPV detection by self-collected oral rinse versus self-collected cytobrush and assessed whether the strength of association between periodontitis and HPV is modified by the collection method. MATERIALS AND
methodsData from a cross-sectional study of Hispanic adults in Puerto Rico (n = 346) who provided oral rinse and cytobrush samples for oral HPV detection and were clinically evaluated for periodontitis. The agreement between the oral mouthwash and cytobrush methods was assessed using the Kappa (κ) statistic. Logistic regression models were used to determine if the association between HPV infection and other risk factors varied by oral sample collection method.
resultsHPV prevalence was slightly higher using cytobrush than oral rinse (5.8% vs. 4.3%). The sensitivity of cytobrush to detect oral HPV was 64.7%, and the specificity was 97.4%. We observed a κ of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.78), indicative of fair to good agreement between the two collection methods. The association between oral HPV infection and periodontitis severity was stronger when using the oral rinse collection method (odds ratio [OR] = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.06-9.84); the association was not statistically significant for cytobrush (OR = 1.96, 95% CI: 0.68-5.65).
conclusionsThese findings support the significance of choosing the most suitable collection method in oral HPV-related studies. Selecting the most appropriate collection method is an essential criterion in oral HPV-related studies.
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.