ReviewDiseases (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Oncological Care During a Crisis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer of the Head and Neck Region in the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Review in Diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe COVID-19 pandemic profoundly disrupted healthcare, prompting adaptations in oncological practices. This systematic review evaluates the pandemic's impact on the management of non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) of the head and neck (H&N) region.
methodsThe review was reported according to PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies compared pre-pandemic and pandemic periods in adult patients treated for head and neck NMSC reporting outcomes related to histological distribution, time to treatment initiation, reconstructive method, and surgical margin status. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for outcomes with sufficient extractable data.
resultsThe review comprised five studies involving 1318 cases. The relative distribution of basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma did not differ significantly between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Time to treatment initiation showed no significant overall change, although heterogeneity was high, indicating substantial variability among healthcare settings. Reconstruction shifted significantly toward primary closure compared with flap reconstruction during the pandemic period (OR 1.90; 95% CI: 1.46-2.47;
conclusionsThe pandemic was associated with a shift toward simpler reconstructive strategies, particularly increased use of primary closure, likely reflecting attempts to reduce operative complexity and resource use. While short-term oncologic outcomes appeared broadly preserved, long-term functional, aesthetic, and patient-reported outcomes remain insufficiently characterized. Future studies should evaluate these outcomes to better inform crisis-adapted oncologic and reconstructive care pathways.
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.