ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Oral Antiseptics against SARS-CoV-2: A Literature Review.
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antiseptics as effective virucidal agents against SARS-CoV-2: Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.The Japanese dental science review · 2025Review
- Antiviral Activity of Halogenated Compounds Derived from L-Tyrosine Against SARS-CoV-2.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- In Vitro Development of Local Antiviral Formulations with Potent Virucidal Activity Against SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza Viruses.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Development of Naphthalene-Derivative Bis-QACs as Potent Antimicrobials: Unraveling Structure-Activity Relationship and Microbiological Properties.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Preprocedural Viral Load Effects of Oral Antiseptics on SARS-CoV-2 in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Aerosol in the oral health-care setting: a misty topic.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dentists are health care workers with the highest risk of exposure to COVID-19, because the oral cavity is considered to be a reservoir for SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The identification of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva, the generation of aerosols, and the proximity to patients during dental procedures are conditions that have led to these health care workers implementing additional disinfection strategies for their protection. Oral antiseptics are widely used chemical substances due to their ability to reduce the number of microorganisms. Although there is still no evidence that they can prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, some preoperative oral antiseptics have been recommended as control measures, by different health institutions worldwide, to reduce the number of microorganisms in aerosols and droplets during dental procedures. Therefore, this review presents the current recommendations for the use of oral antiseptics against SARS-CoV-2 and analyzes the different oral antiseptic options used in dentistry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.