Primary study · included by 1 review
Efficacy of low-level laser therapy for the treatment of burning mouth syndrome: a randomized, controlled trial
Spanemberg 2015 · Spanemberg Juliana Cassol, López José, de Figueiredo Maria Antonia Zancanaro, et al. · Journal of Biomedical Optics · 2015
Included by
| Outcome this study informs | Pooled effect | Evidence | Certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Pain intensity Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -1.00 [-1.98, -0.02] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -1.00 [-1.98, -0.03] | NR | GRADE not reported |
Quality of life Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.74 [-1.30, -0.17] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.75 [-1.24, -0.26] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Quality of life Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.35 [-0.91, 0.21] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Quality of life Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.82 [-1.42, -0.21] | 2 studies · 156 participants | Low |
Quality of life Photobiomodulation / low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.82 [-1.42, -0.21] | 2 studies · 156 participants | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.42 [-0.67, -0.16] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity Photobiomodulation / low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.76 [-1.09, -0.43] | 3 studies · 200 participants | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.86 [-1.44, -0.29] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Quality of life Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -1.16 [-2.20, -0.11] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity Photobiomodulation / low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.81 [-1.35, -0.27] | 3 studies · 200 participants | GRADE not reported |
Quality of life Photobiomodulation / low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.81 [-1.20, -0.42] | 2 studies · 156 participants | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy (PBM/LLLT) vs Inactive control (placebo, sham, usual care or no intervention) · Short-term (immediate post-intervention to 4 weeks) | SMD -0.81 [-1.35, -0.27] | 3 studies · 200 participants | Moderate |
1 including review in total.