Skip to main content
. 2026 Jul 29;18(8):e1021–e1034. doi: 10.4317/jced.63975

Table 3.

Summary of Findings. Question: Photobiomodulation compared to pharmacological intervention for patients with symptomatic oral lichen planus with or without associated skin lesions.

Certainty Assessment Nº of patients Effect Certainty Importance
Outcome No. ofstudies Studydesign Risk ofbias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Otherconsiderations Photobiomodulation Pharmacologicalintervention Relative effect(95% CI) Absolute effect(95% CI)
Recurrence 3 Randomizedtrials Not serious Not serious Not serious Not serious None 12/218 (5.5%) 31/217 (14.3%) RR 0.46(0.25 to 0.87) 77 fewer per 1000(from 107 fewer to 19 fewer) ⊕⊕⊕⊕High CRITICAL
Healing 5 Randomizedtrials Not serious Very seriousᵃ Not serious Not serious None 201/572 (35.1%) 117/574 (20.4%) RR 1.78(1.22 to 2.59) 159 more per 1000(from 45 more to 324 more) ⊕⊕○○Low CRITICAL
Anxiety 2 Randomizedtrials Not serious Seriousᵇ Not serious Seriousᶜ None -/207 -/207 SMD -0.12(-0.40 to 0.16) Not estimable ⊕⊕○○Low IMPORTANT
Lichen Planus Scores 7 Randomizedtrials Not serious Seriousᵈ Not serious Seriousᵉ None -/780 -/753 SMD 0.03(-0.10 to 0.15) Not estimable ⊕⊕○○Low IMPORTANT
VAS Scale 13 Randomizedtrials Not serious Seriousᶠ Not serious Not serious None -/945 -/957 SMD -0.23(-0.41 to -0.06) Not estimable ⊕⊕⊕○Moderate CRITICAL

CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; SMD: Standardized mean difference.Explanations• a. Heterogeneity = 76%.• b. Heterogeneity = 50%.• c. Wide variation in confidence intervals across several time points.• d. Heterogeneity = 51%.• e. Several confidence intervals crossed the null effect.