What do systematic reviews say?

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes

  15-year follow-up
  No harms were reported.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

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

  15-year follow-up
  RR 1.14 [0.91, 1.44]
  1 study · 191873 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes

  15-year follow-up · High-risk individuals (tobacco and/or alcohol users)
  RR 0.97 [0.79, 1.19]
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes

  15-year follow-up
  Data on quality of life were not reported.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

• Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes

  15-year follow-up
  Across the four cycles (15 years), the reported sensitivity of the visual examination in detecting oral cancer was 67.4% (188/279). No information on the specificity or the positive predictive value of the programme…
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Toluidine blue (visual staining) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
  There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
  0 studies
  No studies found

Brush biopsy (oral cytology) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
  There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
  0 studies
  No studies found

Fluorescence imaging / light-based techniques vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
  There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
  0 studies
  No studies found

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

• Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes

  5-year survival
  A significantly higher five-year survival rate was reported in the screened group (55.5%) compared to the control (43.4%) (P value = 0.003).
  1 study · 523 participants
  GRADE not reported