Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38283580›Full record

ReviewThe Japanese dental science review2024

Adjunctive aids for the detection of oral squamous cell carcinoma and oral potentially malignant disorders: A systematic review of systematic reviews.

Jeremy Lau, Guru O, Saman Warnakulasuriya, Ramesh Balasubramaniam, Agnieszka Frydrych, Omar Kujan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Japanese dental science review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

6 authors.

Jeremy LauUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, Australia.
Guru OUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, Australia.
Saman WarnakulasuriyaKing's College London and WHO Collaborating Centre for Oral Cancer, London, UK.
Ramesh BalasubramaniamUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, Australia.
Agnieszka FrydrychUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, Australia.
Omar KujanUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study presents the results of systematic reviews on adjunctive tools in screening and diagnosis of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMD) and to determine if the current literature supports their use as either an adjunctive tool or replacement of gold standard techniques. Systemic reviews and meta-analysis that evaluated adjunctive tools including chemiluminescence, tissue autofluorescence, tissue fluorescence spectroscopy, vital staining and cytology techniques were systematically examined using AMSTAR II. Twenty-seven systematic reviews were included. Five studies had a low quality of evidence, and nine studies had a critically low quality of evidence. This review found limited evidence to recommend chemiluminescence, tissue autofluorescence tools and vital staining as diagnostic tools, but only serve as clinical adjuncts to conventional oral examination. Cytology techniques and narrow-band imaging may be utilised as a non-invasive diagnostic adjunctive tool for the detection of OSCC and the malignant transformation of OPMD. In conclusion, this paper provides evidence on several types of adjunctive tools and provides recommendations on their use in clinical practice. These tools are considered useful as clinical adjuncts but there is insufficient evidence for their use as a diagnostic tool to replace gold standard conventional oral examination and surgical biopsy.

Indexed as

Adjunctive toolOralOral potentially malignant disordersSquamous cell carcinomaSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38283580
PMCPMC10821377

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.