Question · asked by 1 review
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening: Oral cancer incidence
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers showed no clear difference in oral cancer incidence compared with no screening; GRADE not reported.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 15-year follow-up Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers showed no clear difference in oral cancer incidence compared with no screening; GRADE not reported. Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2013) · Cochrane All outcomes | RR 1.14 [0.91, 1.44] | 1 study · 191873 participants | GRADE not reported |
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 15-year follow-up, High-risk individuals (tobacco and/or alcohol users) Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers showed no clear difference in oral cancer incidence compared with no screening; GRADE not reported. Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2013) · Cochrane All outcomes | RR 0.97 [0.79, 1.19] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 9-year follow-up Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2010) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004150.PUB3, superseded | 205 oral cancer patients (intervention) and 158 (control); crude incident rate 43.7 vs 37.6 per 100,000 person-years. | 1 study · 191873 participants | GRADE not reported |
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 9-year follow-up, High-risk individuals (tobacco and/or alcohol users) Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2010) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004150.PUB3, superseded | High-risk individuals incidence (per 100,000 person years): men 65.7 (intervention) vs 81.2 (control); women 108.7 (intervention) vs 87.9 (control). | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 9-year follow-up, High-risk individuals (tobacco and/or alcohol users) Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2006) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004150.PUB2, superseded | High-risk individuals: oral cancer cases 190 (intervention) vs 156 (control); incidence rate 81.1/100,000 person-years vs 83.3/100,000. | 1 study · 84600 participants | GRADE not reported |
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 9-year follow-up Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2006) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004150.PUB2, superseded | 205 oral cancer patients in the intervention group and 158 in the control group. Crude incident rate 43.7/100,000 person-years (intervention) and 37.6/100,000 person-years (control). | 1 study · 191873 participants | GRADE not reported |
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 6-year follow-up Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2003) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004150, superseded | Trivandrum cancer registry recorded 355 patients with oral cancer; 149 in the intervention group and 106 in the control group. Crude incident rate of oral cancer 43.3/100,000 person years (intervention) and… | 1 study · 130779 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes | 22 July 2013 | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.