ArticleJAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery2018
Speech and Communicative Participation in Patients With Facial Paralysis.
Article in JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-Time, Objective Assessment of Facial Paralysis Using a Mobile Tool (FaceADE): Feasibility Case-Control Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Clinical features, evaluation, and management of speech and swallow complications of facial paralysis: A scoping review.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- Immediate Facial Reanimation After Radical Parotidectomy for Malignancy: Oncologic Principles and Reconstructive Strategy.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Review
- A Survey of 251 Facial Paralysis Patients to Assess Their Educational Preparedness and Symptom Management after Treatment of Vestibular Schwannoma.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2025Article
- Single-Stage Versus 2-Stage Facial Reanimation With a Free Functional Muscle Flap: Protocol for a Systematic Review.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Increasing Incidence of Facial Nerve Disorders in the United States from 2007 to 2022.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Should acupuncture therapy be used for acute facial paralysis? A protocol for systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- A Comprehensive Approach to Facial Reanimation: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Multiple Model Evaluation of the Masseteric-to-Facial Nerve Transfer for Reanimation of the Paralyzed Face and Quick Prognostic Prediction.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Association Between Communicative Participation and Psychosocial Factors in Patients With Voice Disorders.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2020Article
- Health-related quality of life in facial palsy: translation and validation of the Dutch version Facial Disability Index.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2020Article
- Complete and Fast Recovery from Idiopathic Facial Paralysis Using Laser-Photobiomodulation.Case reports in dentistry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Problems with speech in patients with facial paralysis are frequently noted by both clinicians and the patients themselves, but limited research exists describing how facial paralysis affects verbal communication. Objective: To assess the influence of facial paralysis on communicative participation. Design, Setting, and Participants: A nationwide online survey of 160 adults with unilateral facial paralysis was conducted from March 1 to June 1, 2017. To assess communicative participation, respondents completed the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) Short Form questionnaire and the Facial Clinimetric Evaluation (FaCE) Scale. Main Outcomes and Measures: The CPIB Short Form and the correlation between the CPIB Short Form and FaCE Scale. In the CPIB, the level of interference in communication is rated on a 4-point Likert scale (where not at all = 3, a little = 2, quite a bit = 1, and very much = 0). Total scores for the 10 items range from 0 (worst) to 30 (best). The FaCE Scale is a 15-item instrument that produces an overall score ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores representing better function and higher quality of life. Results: Of the 160 respondents, 145 (90.6%) were women and 15 were men (mean [SD] age, 45.1 [12.6] years). Most respondents reported having facial paralysis for more than 3 years. Causes of facial paralysis included Bell palsy (86 [53.8%]), tumor (41 [25.6%]), and other causes (33 [20.6%]), including infection, trauma, congenital defects, and surgical complications. The mean (SD) score on the CPIB Short Form was 0.16 (0.88) logits (range, -2.58 to 2.10 logits). The mean (SD) score of the FaCE Scale was 40.92 (16.05) (range, 0-83.3). Significant correlations were observed between the CPIB Short Form and overall FaCE Scale scores, as well as the Social Function, Oral Function, Facial Comfort, and Eye Comfort subdomains of the FaCE Scale, but not with the Facial Movement subdomain. Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with facial paralysis in this study sample reported restrictions in communicative participation that were comparable with restrictions experienced by patients with other known communicative disorders, such as laryngectomy and head and neck cancer. We believe that communicative participation represents a unique domain of dysfunction and can help quantify the outcome of facial paralysis and provide an additional frame of reference when assessing treatment outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.