Search

Background: Betel quid (BQ) consumption is prevalent globally, majorly consumed in South-Asia and South-East Asian countries. Among the other country studies done on BQ, the focus has been on its consumption prevalence, its physiological and psychological effects, and aids to discontinue this habit. Systematic literature research on suitability of different instruments (metric or scale) to measure BQ dependency is scarce, hence pointing to the need of more evidence-based studies in this domain. Aim: The aim of the article was to identify the instruments used in the published literature to measure BQ dependency among young and adult chewers and draw a comparison. Methodology: The electronic retrieval systems and databases PubMed (Medline), Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched independently by two authors from January 2011 to September 2022 for the collection of desired data. Results: Among 1271 articles, 337 were duplicates and removed, 866 did not meet selection criteria. Out of 68 articles, 57 were excluded due to the lack of relevant data. Finally, only 11 articles were included for the analysis in this systematic review. Conclusion: Due to a scarcity of researches in this direction, no scale can be assigned as the best Dependence Scale, thus necessitating more such systematic reviews and meta-analysis for better comprehension and usage of present dependence scales.

Background: Betel quid (BQ) consumption is prevalent globally, majorly consumed in South-Asia and South-East Asian countries. Among the other country studies done on BQ, the focus has been on its consumption prevalence, its physiological and psychological effects, and aids to discontinue this habit. Systematic literature research on suitability of different instruments (metric or scale) to measure BQ dependency is scarce, hence pointing to the need of more evidence-based studies in this domain. Aim: The aim of the article was to identify the instruments used in the published literature to measure BQ dependency among young and adult chewers and draw a comparison. Methodology: The electronic retrieval systems and databases PubMed (Medline), Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched independently by two authors from January 2011 to September 2022 for the collection of desired data. Results: Among 1271 articles, 337 were duplicates and removed, 866 did not meet selection criteria. Out of 68 articles, 57 were excluded due to the lack of relevant data. Finally, only 11 articles were included for the analysis in this systematic review. Conclusion: Due to a scarcity of researches in this direction, no scale can be assigned as the best Dependence Scale, thus necessitating more such systematic reviews and meta-analysis for better comprehension and usage of present dependence scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]