SynthesisBMC oral health2026
Vitamin D status in patients with oral leukoplakia and oral squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVitamin D deficiency has been widely evidenced to be associated with promoting cancer progression. Herein, we performed a meta-analysis and systematic review of studies assessing vitamin D status in oral leukoplakia (OLK) and oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).
methodsThis review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251113481) and followed PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science, with manual searches of reference lists through August 2025. Meta-analyses of proportion deficiency were performed using random-effects models.
resultsA total of seven studies met inclusion criteria, involving a total of 317 healthy controls, 45 OLK patients, and 168 OSCC patients. Vitamin D deficiency rates were 45% (threshold: 30 ng/mL) and 65% (35 ng/mL) in healthy controls, exceeding 90% in OLK/OSCC patients at both thresholds. Compared with healthy controls, a significant difference was observed in the forest plot in OLK patients (odds ratio (OR) = 36.84, 95% CI: 7.35–184.51, I2 = 0%), and in OSCC patients (OR = 32.43, 95% CI: 4.40–238.96, I2 = 35.5% at 30 ng/mL; OR = 4.67, 95% CI: 2.31–9.45, I2 = 0% at 35 ng/mL). Serum vitamin D concentrations were consistently lower in OSCC patients than healthy controls (pooled weighted mean differences: -15.35 ng/mL, 95% CI: -19.33 ng/mL to -11.36 ng/mL, I2 = 66.4% ).
conclusionThis systematic literature review and meta-analysis demonstrated that patients with OLK or OSCC exhibit significantly higher rates of vitamin D deficiency and lower serum concentrations compared to healthy controls. Therefore, the assessment of vitamin D status may be considered in clinical practice for individuals with OLK or OSCC.
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.