Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41321984›Full record

ArticleJID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health2026

Clinician and Patient Perspectives in Oral Lichen Planus: Correlation and Drivers of Disease Severity and QOL.

Emma L Myers, Sarah G McAlpine, Donna A Culton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Emma L MyersUniversity of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Sarah G McAlpineUniversity of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Donna A CultonDepartment of Dermatology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oral lichen planus is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory condition that significantly impacts QOL. Clinician-reported measures, such as the Oral Disease Severity Score (ODSS), systematically evaluate clinical severity but may not adequately reflect patient experience. Patient-reported outcome measures, such as the Chronic Oral Mucosal Disease Questionnaire (COMDQ-26), provide QOL insights, although their relationship with clinical severity remains underexplored. This study aimed to assess alignment between clinician-assessed severity (measured by ODSS) and patient-reported QOL (measured by COMDQ-26) in oral lichen planus across sex and disease subtypes as well as to identify key drivers of these scores. A retrospective review of 78 patients with oral lichen planus was conducted with assessment of demographics, disease subtypes, ODSS, COMDQ-26, and pain scores. Erythematous and erosive/ulcerative subtypes had the highest severity and QOL impact scores, with no significant score differences between these subtypes. ODSS components (site, activity, pain) contributed equally to total severity, whereas the COMDQ-26 patient support domain most strongly drove QOL scores. Moderate ODSS-COMDQ-26 correlations indicated only partial alignment between clinician- and patient-reported measures. We conclude that integrating patient-reported outcome measures into clinical practice and trials may improve oral lichen planus care through more comprehensive, individualized, and subtype-focused strategies.

Indexed as

Disease severityOral lichen planusOral mucosal diseasePatient-reported outcomesQOL

Identifiers

PMID41321984
PMCPMC12657722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.