ArticleHealth science reports2026
The Current State of Global Awareness and Knowledge on Oral Cancer: A Narrative Review.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. 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.
- Oral Cancer Awareness, Screening Behavior, and Risk-Factor Recognition Among Patients Attending a University Dental Hospital.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Limited public knowledge of oral cancer often results in late-stage diagnosis, contributing to its status as a global health burden. This narrative review aims to systematically pool gather evidence on current information sources and current state of awareness and knowledge on definition, risk factors, clinical features, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of oral cancer, to identify knowledge gaps and public health implications. Methods: This narrative review relied on secondary data obtained from relevant literature obtained from PubMed, Google Scholar, and websites of reputable health organizations. Only those literatures published in English were utilized, and most of them were published within the past 5 years to ensure that the evidence synthesised in this review are based on contemporary evidence. Results: Most of the obtained research focused on Asian populations, community members, students, and patients, with limited attention to healthcare professionals and high-risk groups like farmers and sex workers. The preferred information sources on oral cancer included digital media (TV, internet, radio) and non-digital channels (healthcare workers, newspapers), though the latter remained more commonly used despite the growing potential of digital tools. Awareness of oral cancer's definition varied widely (15%-99%) with the highest levels observed among medical/dental students. Knowledge on established oral cancer risk factors (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, human papillomavirus) was inconsistent, with misinformation commonly observed among lay populations. Non-healing ulcers and bleeding were reported as poorly recognized clinical features, even among professionals, while pain was notably underreported. Knowledge on prevention (e.g. smoking cessation and screening) was generally low, and awareness of diagnostic tools (e.g. biopsies) were limited to health trainees in Asia. Awareness of treatment options varied, with limited understanding of the roles of specialist healthcare providers. Conclusion: The findings of this review highlight the importance of more inclusive research to guide targeted interventions on oral cancer.
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.