This manuscript has many deficiencies as follows;
1. The sample size is low and the authors have stated this in the discussion as a weakness.
2. If over 40 % of lesions are treatment related how can the oral lesions be predictive of severe disease? This is a typical chicken and egg situation. Which comes first?
3. The authors assume that all patients are infected with the Omicron variant of SASR-COV-2 but they say in the conclusion that the the findings are definitely from a cohort with s single sub-strain infected patient group
Due to these caveats I am uncertain whether oral lesions could be productive of severity of illness.The authors should do a prospective time series study to confirm their hypothesis.
(There are several typos and grammatical errors in the script as well.)

Fo the above reasons I am reluctant to suggest acceptance of the manuscript.

This is a reasonable prospective study of oral lesions in COVID-9 patients and adds to the literature. But there is a major flaw as mentioned below which permeates the whole ms. This should be addressed.

1.sars-CoV-2 should be SARS-CoV-2 Please correct throughout.
2. How did the authors assume that the lesions were virus infections without any virology lab evaluations? This is a critical assumption and should be mentioned as a major weakness of the study in the discussion section.