ArticleHeliyon2024
Distribution of Epstein-Barr virus in the oral cavity of Thais with various oral mucosal conditions.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigation of genetic and lifestyle risk factors associated with Epstein-Barr virus reactivation in the Thai population.Biomedical reports · 2026Article
- Association between Epstein Barr virus and Oral Lichen Planus clinical phenotypes and p53 expression.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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
Objectives: We aimed to examine the presence of EBV, EBV strains, and variants among 3 oral conditions including normal oral mucosa (NOM), oral potentially malignant disorders/oral cancer (OPMDs/OC) and non-OPMDs/OC in a group of Thais. Material and methods: Oral exfoliated cells were obtained from 315 participants living in the northeastern and central regions of Thailand. The participants were divided into 3 groups encompassing the NOM, the OPMDs/OC and the non-OPMDs/OC groups. The presence of EBV was first determined by PCR using primers for Results: The prevalence of EBV in OPMDs/OC, non-OPMDs/OC and NOM were 72.0 %, 56.2 %, and 27.2 % respectively. EBV type A, B and AB were found in 52.1 %, 32.1 % and 15.8 % of all positive samples, respectively. The percentage of participants with EBV type A was more prominent in the NOM group (72.0 %) compared to the non-OPMDs/OC (54.8 %) and the OPMDs/OC group (41.8 %) whereas EBV type B was higher in the OPMDs/OC group (35.8 %) compared to the non-OPMDs/OC (31.5 %) and the NOM (24.0 %) groups. Regarding EBV variants, 30-bp deletion Conclusions: High frequency of EBV was demonstrated in the OPMDs/OC group. EBV type A was more predominant in the NOM group whereas EBV type B was more prevalent in the OPMDs/OC group. The del-LMP1 variant was more common in the OPMDs/OC and the non-OPMDs/OC groups.
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.