Table 1.
GRADE evaluation of interventions for burning mouth syndrome
| Important outcomes | Symptom relief, adverse effects | ||||||||
| Number of studies (participants) | Outcome | Comparison | Type of evidence | Quality | Consistency | Directness | Effect size | GRADE | Comment |
| What are the effects of selected treatments for burning mouth syndrome? | |||||||||
| 1 (30) [29] | Symptom relief | CBT v control | 4 | –3 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data, incomplete reporting of results, and uncertainty about methods of validation of outcomes; directness point deducted for uncertainty about comparisons between the groups |
| 3 (134) [43] [44] [45] | Symptom relief | Benzodiazepines v placebo | 4 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for sparse data; directness point deducted for differences in regimens and duration of treatment and follow-up across studies |
| 1 (76) [54] | Symptom relief | SSRIs v each other | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results; directness point deducted for differences in disease state |
| 1 (30) [47] | Symptom relief | Benzydamine hydrochloride v placebo | 4 | –3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data, incomplete reporting of results, and blinding flaws |
| 7 (340) [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] | Symptom relief | Alphalipoic acid v placebo | 4 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for methodological flaws (incomplete reporting of results, imbalance in numbers of people in groups in some RCTs, and lack of statistical assessment of between-group difference in some RCTs); directness point deducted for variation in doses of alphalipoic acid used across studies and variation in outcome assessment |
Type of evidence: 4 = RCT; 2 = Observational; 1 = Non-analytical/expert opinion. Consistency: similarity of results across studies. Directness: generaliseability of population or outcomes. Effect size: based on relative risk or odds ratio.