Question · asked by 1 review

Oral cancer patients (cases) vs Healthy controls: Periodontitis (clinical attachment loss)

Population
Adults in case-control studies (oral cancer patients vs healthy controls)
Intervention
Oral cancer patients (cases)
Comparison
Healthy controls
Outcome
Periodontitis (clinical attachment loss)

Clinical attachment loss was significantly greater in oral cancer patients than controls (SMD 1.94, 95% CI 0.22-3.66), though heterogeneity was very high (I2=96.7%); ungraded.

What each review found

Current versions only
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Oral cancer patients (cases) vs Healthy controls
Clinical attachment loss (CAL) in OC cases vs controls · Adults in case-control studies (oral cancer patients vs healthy controls) · Not specified, Case-control studies conducted in Asia (n=6), Europe (n=5), USA (n=2) and other countries (n=3), CAL (clinical attachment loss)
Clinical attachment loss was significantly greater in oral cancer patients than controls (SMD 1.94, 95% CI 0.22-3.66), though heterogeneity was very high (I2=96.7%); ungraded.
Periodontitis and the risk of oral cancer: a meta-analysis of case-control studies. (2024) All outcomes
SMD 1.94 [0.22, 3.66]2 studiesGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Periodontitis and the risk of oral cancer: a meta-analysis of case-control studies.
2024 All outcomes
Up to September 2023 (databases from inception)16Not applicable
How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.