↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of burning mouth syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Psychosomatic Research, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of burning mouth syndrome
Published in
Journal of Psychosomatic Research, May 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.05.001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steve Kisely, Malcolm Forbes, Emily Sawyer, Emma Black, Ratilal Lalloo

Abstract

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is characterized by burning of the oral mucosa in the absence of underlying dental or medical causes. The results of previous systematic reviews have generally been equivocal. However, findings for most interventions are based on searches of 5-10years ago. This study therefore updates previous searches of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for pain as assessed by Visual Analogue Scales (VAS). Secondary outcomes included quality of life, mood, taste and salivary flow. A search of MEDLINE and Embase up to 2016. 24 RCTs were identified. Meta-analyses were impossible because of wide variations in study method and quality. The commonest interventions were alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) (8 comparisons), capsaicin or an analogue (4 comparisons), clonazepam (3 comparisons) and psychotherapy (2 comparisons). ALA and capsaicin led to significantly greater improvements in VAS (4 studies each), as did clonazepam (all 3 studies), at up to two month follow-up. However, capsaicin led to prominent dyspepsia. Psychotherapy significantly improved outcomes in one study at two and 12month follow-up. Catauma and tongue-protectors also showed promise (one study each). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes except in the one study of tongue protectors. At least in some studies and for some outcomes, ALA, clonazepam, capsaicin and psychotherapy may show modest benefit in the first two months. However, these conclusions are limited by generally short follow-up periods, high study variability and low participant numbers. Further RCTs with follow-up of at least 12months are indicated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Researcher 7 6%
Other 26 24%
Unknown 33 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 47%
Psychology 4 4%
Unspecified 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 35 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2021.
All research outputs
#7,047,316
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Psychosomatic Research
#1,108
of 3,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,171
of 315,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Psychosomatic Research
#15
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,806 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.