ArticleScientific reports2022
Differences in the microbiota of oral rinse, lesion, and normal site samples from patients with mucosal abnormalities on the tongue.
Article in Scientific reports, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alterations of oral microbiome in oral potentially malignant disorders: a systematic review.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
- Oral microbiome dynamics in head and neck cancer patients undergoing oral healthcare: implications for prognosis and early diagnosis.BMC microbiology · 2025Trial
- Site-specific oral microbiome profiles in healthy young Korean women.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Characterising oral microbial signatures for periodontal disease in the NHANES population.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Oral Microbiome in Oral Cancer Research from Sampling to Analysis: Strategies, Challenges, and Recommendations.Cancers · 2025Review
- Is Short-Read 16S rRNA Sequencing of Oral Microbiome Sampling a Suitable Diagnostic Tool for Head and Neck Cancer?Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The oral microbiota associated with mucosal diseases, including oral squamous cell carcinoma and oral potentially malignant disorders, have been extensively analyzed at the phylum and genus levels. However, the details of the oral microbiota remain unclear at the species and operational taxonomic unit (OTU) levels. We aimed to determine differences in the microbiota of oral rinse, lesion and normal site swab samples of patients with mucosal abnormalities on the tongues. Oral samples were obtained from 10 patients with oral mucosal abnormalities. Alpha and beta diversity at the OTU and genus levels of the microbiota samples were analyzed using OTUs clustered with 99.6% similarity based on 16S rRNA gene sequences obtained using the Sanger method. At the OTU level, the microbiota of the lesions were the least diverse but were different from those of the normal site and oral rinse samples. The OTUs corresponding to Streptococcus infantis and Haemophilus parainfluenzae were suggested to contribute to the differences between the microbiota of the lesions and normal sites. At the genus level, no significant differences between these microbiota were observed. In conclusion, strict OTU-level microbiota analysis might be able to discriminate lesions from normal sites of patients with mucosal abnormalities.
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.