ArticleInternational journal of cancer2026
Oral cancer risk stratification: A cross-sectional population-based screening study in Northeast India.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oral cancer risk stratification: A cross-sectional population-based screening study in Northeast India.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Evaluating patients with oral leukoplakia in smokers versus non-smokers: A clinico-histopathological study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Salivary biomarkers in oral cancer diagnosis: advancing conventional treatment strategies.Military Medical Research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We conducted a cross-sectional oral cancer screening study in Northeast India to develop and validate an oral precancer/cancer risk prediction model. We compared epidemiologic profiles between tobacco pouch keratosis and oral precancer/cancer. During 2018-2022, we recruited 14,749 participants who underwent an interviewer-administered questionnaire and oral examination (visual inspection and autofluorescence). Logistic regression was used to compare risk factors between tobacco pouch keratosis and precancer/cancer and risk model development for prevalent lesions (keratosis and oral precancer/cancer, combined). Model validation was conducted internally and externally (Kerala oral cancer screening trial). Among the 14,749 participants, as per dentists' diagnosis, 1365 lesions were identified. These included 249 benign lesions (prevalence = 1.6%), 795 tobacco pouch keratosis (prevalence = 5.4%), and 321 precancers/cancers (prevalence = 2.2%). Agreement between dentists and health workers was high for visual diagnosis of prevalent lesions (keratotic/precancer/cancer; positive-agreement = 87.5%; kappa = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.75-0.78). Risk factor profiles were similar between tobacco pouch keratosis and oral precancer/cancer. The risk prediction model (based on age, sex, education, income, chewing duration, chewing type, smoking duration and intensity, alcohol duration and intensity) had good discrimination (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.83) and calibration (E/O ratio = 1.00) internally. Further, 30% of individuals at the highest model-predicted risk accounted for 81.8% of prevalent lesions. However, in external validation, the risk model had modest discrimination (AUC = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.66-0.68) and poor calibration (E/O ratio = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.50-0.54). Our results suggest tobacco pouch keratosis as an early carcinogenic event amenable for behavioral interception. Poor transportability of our risk model reflects the need for prediction models that account for geographic differences in risk factors within regions in India.
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.