Chmieliauskaite, Milda, Stelson, Elisabeth A., Epstein, Joel B., Klasser, Gary D., Farag, Arwa, Carey, Barbara, Albuquerque, Rui, Mejia, Lina, Ariyawardana, Anura, Nasri-Heir, Cibele, Sardella, Andrea, Carlson, Charles, and Miller, Craig S. (2022) Reply to Currie et al. Pain, 163 (5). E692-E693.

PDF (Published Version) - Published Version Restricted to Repository staff only

 

1

Abstract

[Extract] We would like to thank Currie et al.3 for initiating a discussion on our recent publication to rename and improve the International Classification of Diseases-11 disease criteria for burning mouth syndrome.4 In this article, we presented the results of a consensus reached by an international group of experts using the Delphi methodology.2

As Currie et al. pointed out, there are many overlapping and complementary aspects between the betaversion of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Burning Mouth Syndrome (RDC/BMS) and our work, strengthening and increasing the validity of each.2–4 We agree with most of what Currie et al. have written in their letter.3 However, regarding nomenclature, we would like to encourage using the term burning mouth disorder in the beta version of the RDC/BMS until there is additional evidence for the cause(s) of oral burning symptoms at which time an ontological approach to the name may be substituted. In our previous publication, our team also highlighted a number of reasons why the word syndrome could be replaced with the word disorder.6 The adoption of the term temporomandibular disorders and creation of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMDs) is not without ontological flaws, as noted by Ceusters et al.1 However, it has provided a standardized nomenclature and robust framework for research into the etiology, pathophysiology, classification, and treatment of the disorders.8 By using the term burning mouth disorder, the beta version of the RDC/BMS could serve as a model framework for future research.

Actions (Repository Staff Only)

Item Control Page