The Current State of Global Awareness and Knowledge on Oral Cancer: A Narrative Review

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background and Aims: Limited public knowledge of oral cancer often results in late-stage diagnosis, contributing to its status as a global health burden. This narrative review aims to systematically pool gather evidence on current information sources and current state of awareness and knowledge on definition, risk factors, clinical features, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of oral cancer, to identify knowledge gaps and public health implications. Methods: This narrative review relied on secondary data obtained from relevant literature obtained from PubMed, Google Scholar, and websites of reputable health organizations. Only those literatures published in English were utilized, and most of them were published within the past 5 years to ensure that the evidence synthesised in this review are based on contemporary evidence. Results: Most of the obtained research focused on Asian populations, community members, students, and patients, with limited attention to healthcare professionals and high-risk groups like farmers and sex workers. The preferred information sources on oral cancer included digital media (TV, internet, radio) and non-digital channels (healthcare workers, newspapers), though the latter remained more commonly used despite the growing potential of digital tools. Awareness of oral cancer's definition varied widely (15%-99%) with the highest levels observed among medical/dental students. Knowledge on established oral cancer risk factors (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, human papillomavirus) was inconsistent, with misinformation commonly observed among lay populations. Non-healing ulcers and bleeding were reported as poorly recognized clinical features, even among professionals, while pain was notably underreported. Knowledge on prevention (e.g. smoking cessation and screening) was generally low, and awareness of diagnostic tools (e.g. biopsies) were limited to health trainees in Asia. Awareness of treatment options varied, with limited understanding of the roles of specialist healthcare providers. Conclusion: The findings of this review highlight the importance of more inclusive research to guide targeted interventions on oral cancer.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.