Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36189128›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2022

Effectiveness of screening for oral cancer and oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMD): A systematic review.

Uzayr Parak, Andre Lopes Carvalho, Felipe Roitberg, Olena Mandrik

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. A guide to cancer screening.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Differences in near-infrared fluorescence imaging and histological analysis of cheek mucosa in golden hamsters with different pathological states.Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Uzayr ParakSchool of Health and Related Research, Health Economics and Decision Science, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Sheffield S1 4DA, United Kingdom.
Andre Lopes CarvalhoInternational Agency for Research on Cancer/World Health Organization, Lyon, France.
Felipe RoitbergWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Olena MandrikSchool of Health and Related Research, Health Economics and Decision Science, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Sheffield S1 4DA, United Kingdom.
University of Sheffield · GBCentre International de Recherche sur le Cancer · FRWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oral cancer (OC) is a debilitating disease with a high mortality rate when diagnosed in advanced stage. Conversely, early-stage OC has a high survival rate, supporting a need for early detection programmes. A previous systematic review of clinical trials evaluating efficacy of screening for OC was inconclusive. This systematic review aimed to determine the impact of screening for oral lesions on reducing mortality and incidence of OC by looking at a broader spectrum of evidence. The search for randomized controlled trials and observational studies with a control group was conducted in PubMed, OVID, Cochrane, CINAHL and grey literature sources. Risk of bias for included studies was assessed with the tools developed by the Cochrane collaboration. Six out of two identified randomized trials and five observational studies had moderate to high risk of bias. Nevertheless, the predictions on impact of OC screening on incidence and mortality were similar across the majority of the studies. The

Indexed as

CG, Control groupCI, Confidence intervalCINAHL, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health LiteratureCOE, Conventional oral examinationEffectivenessEfficacyIG, Intervention groupISRTCN, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial NumberMSE, Mucosal self-examinationOC, Oral cancerOPMD, Oral potentially malignant disordersOral cancerOR, Odds ratioOSF, Oral submucous fibrosisPremalignantPYO, Person years of observationRCT, Randomized clinical trialROBINS-I, Risk of bias in non-randomized interventional studiesROB, Risk of biasRR, Risk ratio/Relative riskScreeningSystematic reviewTB, Toluidine blue

Identifiers

PMID36189128
PMCPMC9516446
OpenAlexW4296381444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.