The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Oral epithelial dysplasia classification systems: predictive value, utility, weaknesses and scope for improvement
Abstract
At a workshop coordinated by the WHO Collaborating Centre for Oral Cancer and Precancer in the United Kingdom issues related to potentially malignant disorders of the oral cavity were discussed by an expert group. The consensus views of the Working Group are presented in a series of papers. In this report, we review the oral epithelial dysplasia classification systems. The three classification schemes [oral epithelial dysplasia scoring system, squamous intraepithelial neoplasia and Ljubljana classification] were presented and the Working Group recommended epithelial dysplasia grading for routine use. Although most oral pathologists possibly recognize and accept the criteria for grading epithelial dysplasia, firstly based on architectural features and then of cytology, there is great variability in their interpretation of the presence, degree and significance of the individual criteria. Several studies have shown great interexaminer and intraexaminer variability in the assessment of the presence or absence and the grade of oral epithelial dysplasia. The Working Group considered the two class classification (no/questionable/ mild – low risk; moderate or severe – implying high risk) and was of the view that reducing the number of choices from 3 to 2 may increase the likelihood of agreement between pathologists. The utility of this need to be tested in future studies. The variables that are likely to affect oral epithelial dysplasia scoring were discussed and are outlined here; these need to be researched in longitudinal studies to explore the biological significance of a low‐risk or high‐risk dysplasia.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Malignant transformation of oral leukoplakia: a systematic review of observational studies
Warnakulasuriya, S., & Ariyawardana, A. (2016) · Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine · doi:10.1111/jop.12339 · Cited by 502
Self-citationInflammatory Response Mechanisms of the Dentine–Pulp Complex and the Periapical Tissues
Galler, K. M., Weber, M., Korkmaz, Y., Widbiller, M., & Feuerer, M. (2021) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms22031480 · Cited by 455
Oral health risks of tobacco use and effects of cessation
Warnakulasuriya, S., Dietrich, T., Bornstein, M. M., Peidró, E. C., Preshaw, P. M., Walter, C., Wennström, J. L., & Bergström, J. (2010) · International Dental Journal · doi:10.1016/s0020-6539(20)34036-3 · Cited by 393
Self-citationDionne, K. R., Warnakulasuriya, S., Binti Zain, R., & Cheong, S. C. (2015) · International Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1002/ijc.28754 · Cited by 248
Self-citationCzerninski, R., Amornphimoltham, P., Patel, V., Molinolo, A. A., & Gutkind, J. S. (2009) · Cancer Prevention Research · doi:10.1158/1940-6207.capr-08-0147 · Cited by 140
Metadata
- Authors
- Warnakulasuriya, S., Reibel, J., Bouquot, J., & Dabelsteen, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-02-03
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 127-133
- ISSN
- 0300-9777 (ISSN-L)
- 0904-2512
- 1600-0714
- OpenAlex
- W1815338083
- Cited by
- 651
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 35.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Oral epithelial dysplasia classification systems: predictive value, utility, weaknesses and scope for improvement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-0714.2007.00584.x
- The paper
- Warnakulasuriya, S., Reibel, J., Bouquot, J., & Dabelsteen, E. (2008). Oral epithelial dysplasia classification systems: predictive value, utility, weaknesses and scope for improvement. Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0714.2007.00584.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.