ReviewCureus2025
Does Mouthwash Use Affect Oral Cancer Risk? A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Drugstore or discount? A study on fluoride, pH and acidity of commercial mouthwashes in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies indicate a strong correlation between the length and degree of alcohol and tobacco use and the risk of oral cancer (OC). However, there has been debate concerning the usage of mouthwashes and associated higher risk of OC for many years. The purpose of this study was to gain insight into how using mouthwash influenced the risk of OC. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol was used when searching the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Observational studies that addressed the relationship between mouthwash use and OC and involved adult or older adult populations were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was employed to check the methodological quality, and random effects meta-analysis, along with other subgroup analyses and meta-regression, were utilized to synthesize quantitative data. Out of 5,132 papers identified, 15 case-control studies comprising 6,515 cases and 17,037 controls were included in the review. Seventeen effect measures from these 15 studies were included in the meta-analysis. For individuals who used mouthwash three or more times a day, the pooled OR for OC was 1.00 (95% CI: 0.79-1.26; n = 17 studies). Among those who had used mouthwash for more than 40 years, the OR was 1.30 (95% CI: 1.58-4.82; p = 0.05; n = 2 studies). Some studies suggest that frequent mouthwash use may increase the risk of OC. Given the biological plausibility of this link, we exercise caution in interpreting these findings. It is important to note the limited research on the frequency and duration of mouthwash use. Thus, for the strengthening of the evidence for a possible dose-response effect of mouthwashes on OC risk, we suggest that future research should be focused on the frequency, duration, and substance of mouthwashes in depth.
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.