ReviewCureus2025
Oral Health Consequences of Smokeless Tobacco Use: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of gingival phenotype among adult male naswar users, cigarette smokers and non-tobacco users: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Association of Dental Status and Smokeless Tobacco (SLT) Using Behavior Among Bangladeshi Dental Patients: A Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis.Substance use : research and treatmentArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smokeless tobacco (SLT), including snus, chewing tobacco, naswar, and nicotine pouches, is widely used and often perceived as a safer alternative to smoking. Among current users of SLT, mucosal alterations-most commonly smokeless-tobacco keratosis and white plaque-like lesions-are frequently observed at product placement sites, such as between the lip and gum, with patterns closely linked to the frequency and duration of use. Several reports describe partial or complete regression of these lesions after discontinuation. Periodontal findings are mixed: increased gingival recession - particularly at anterior sites corresponding to product placement - appears consistently, whereas links with deeper periodontal destruction are inconsistent and often confounded by oral hygiene and concomitant cigarette smoking. Additional oral effects observed with SLT use include extrinsic staining, tooth wear or abrasion, and increased caries prevalence associated with products containing sweeteners or coarse particulates. Regarding malignancy, signals from observational literature indicate an association between SLT exposure and oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), although the magnitude of risk appears to vary by product chemistry (e.g., nitrosamine content, pH), processing methods, and regional usage patterns. Evidence remains heterogeneous, limiting direct comparisons across products and populations. Small biomarker studies also report elevated salivary pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α) among users with mucosal changes, but clinical utility is uncertain. Overall, current evidence links SLT with frequent, often reversible local mucosal alterations, consistent placement-site gingival recession, and a possible product-dependent elevation in OSCC risk. These observations underscore the importance of establishing uniform definitions for outcomes and consistent measures of exposure in studies of SLT to facilitate valid comparisons across different products and populations. In addition, further research is warranted to explore the motivations for SLT use and to delineate dose-response relationships and potential malignant transformation, with particular attention to emerging nicotine pouch products.
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.