Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42087147›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2026

Dry Mouth by Report or by Measure? Comparison of Fox and Xerostomia Inventory Scores with Sialometry.

Magdalena Ostrowska, Layla Settaf-Cherif, Jan Kiersztyn, Adam Ostrowski, Tomasz A Drewa, Jan Adamowicz, Maciej J Wróbel

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

7 authors.

Magdalena OstrowskaDepartment of Otolaryngology and Laryngological Oncology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland. magdalena.ostrowska@cm.umk.pl.ORCID 0000-0003-3323-3516
Layla Settaf-CherifDepartment of Urology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.ORCID 0009-0007-6891-0456
Jan KiersztynDepartment of Urology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.
Adam OstrowskiDepartment of Urology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5057-3507
Tomasz A DrewaDepartment of Urology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-5347-4136
Jan AdamowiczDepartment of Urology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2479-7133
Maciej J WróbelDepartment of Otolaryngology and Laryngological Oncology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-1865-2122

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite its high prevalence, xerostomia remains frequently misunderstood and often incorrectly assumed to be synonymous with reduced salivary flow. In reality, these two terms- xerostomia and hyposalivation - are not interchangeable. We aimed to quantify how Fox questionnaire and the Xerostomia Inventory (XI) relate to unstimulated salivary flow, identify the most informative items, and evaluate whether total scores and item‑based models discriminate clinically relevant hyposalivation thresholds and treatment‑related deterioration.

methodsWe analyzed 101 adults with overactive bladder contributing 202 paired assessments (fixed order: off‑treatment baseline, on‑treatment follow‑up). Xerostomia was assessed using the Fox questionnaire (0-10) and Xerostomia Inventory (XI; 11-55). Unstimulated salivary flow (mL/min) was measured with the 5‑min spitting method. Associations between questionnaire scores and salivary flow were summarized using Pearson correlations. Discrimination for hyposalivation thresholds (<0.10, <0.066, <0.033 mL/min) was evaluated using ROC/AUC with cluster bootstrap 95% CIs; item‑based screening was explored using LASSO with patient‑level cross‑validation.

resultsContinuous associations: Fox scores were more strongly associated with salivary flow than XI (r = -0.356 vs -0.160), while Fox and XI totals were strongly correlated (r = 0.71). Threshold discrimination: for hyposalivation <0.10 mL/min, AUC was 0.704 for Fox and 0.586 for XI. A sparse XI item model (six items) improved discrimination compared with the XI total score (CV‑AUC 0.709 vs 0.580). During treatment, 29/101 participants met the deterioration endpoint (≥50% reduction in flow and/or incident hyposalivation).

conclusionsQuestionnaire scores showed limited criterion validity for objective hypofunction. Fox performed better than XI for identifying hyposalivation, and item‑focused models were promising but exploratory. We propose a pragmatic diagnostic approach in which questionnaires quantify symptom burden and triage risk, while sialometry confirms hyposalivation when clinically relevant.

Indexed as

XerostomiaAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSalivaSurveys and QuestionnairesUrinary Bladder, OveractiveFoxHyposalivationMedication-inducedOABXerostomia

Identifiers

PMID42087147
PMCPMC13217938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.