ReviewCureus2026
Psychological Distress Among Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Professionals: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Psychological distress among oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) professionals is increasingly recognized as a concern due to the demanding nature of training and clinical practice. This systematic review aimed to synthesize available evidence on perceived stress and psychological distress among OMFS surgeons, residents, and trainees. A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was conducted up to April 10, 2026. Six cross-sectional studies comprising 1,149 OMFS participants met the inclusion criteria. Due to substantial heterogeneity in measurement instruments, study populations, and outcome reporting, a meta-analysis was not performed, and findings were synthesized narratively in accordance with Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) principles. Across studies, a consistently high burden of psychological distress was observed, with moderate-to-severe anxiety reported in a substantial proportion of trainees and nearly half of surgeons classified as at risk of burnout. Residents demonstrated higher perceived stress levels compared to practicing surgeons. Workload-related factors, including long working hours and frequent on-call duties, were strongly associated with increased stress and burnout risk. In contrast, psychosocial factors such as academic pressure and workplace dynamics further contributed. Despite variability in measurement approaches, a consistent relationship was observed between increased occupational demands and reduced well-being. The findings highlight the need for standardized assessment tools and targeted interventions addressing both individual and institutional factors to improve mental health outcomes and support workforce sustainability in OMFS.
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.