ArticleJournal of oral rehabilitation2026
Comparative Study of Clinical Characteristics According to Pain Distribution in Lingual Burning Mouth Syndrome.
Article in Journal of oral rehabilitation, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe pathophysiology of burning mouth syndrome (BMS) remains unclear.
objectivesTo compare the clinical characteristics of patients with lingual BMS according to pain distribution.
methodsThe medical records of patients with lingual BMS who visited the oral clinic of Kyung Hee University Korean Medicine Hospital between January 2023 and December 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified according to tongue pain distribution as follows: laterality (unilateral vs. bilateral), extent (localised vs. generalised) and central tongue involvement (non-central vs. central involvement). Group differences and associations among clinical characteristics, including pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]), quality of life, salivary flow and taste disturbance, were assessed.
resultsIn total, 256 patients were included. Patients with bilateral pain showed significantly higher pain intensity than those with unilateral pain. Patients with generalised pain reported significantly higher pain intensity than those with localised pain. Patients with central involvement showed significantly higher pain intensity than those with non-central involvement. Pain intensity was negatively associated with quality of life in most subgroups, except the unilateral subgroup. Taste disturbance was associated with clinically significant pain (VAS ≥ 4) in the unilateral and localised subgroups, whereas reduced salivary flow was associated with clinically significant pain in the central involvement subgroup.
conclusionsPain distribution may help identify clinical subtypes of lingual BMS and support individualised assessment. Herein, pain distribution was associated with differences in pain intensity, quality of life, taste disturbance and salivary flow, underscoring the heterogeneous and multifactorial pathophysiology of lingual BMS and the need for tailored management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42457630What 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.