ArticlePloS one2022
Magnetoencephalographic evaluation of repaired lip sensation in patients with cleft lip.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mobile human brain imaging using functional ultrasound.Science advances · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCleft lip is the most common congenital anomaly worldwide. Nevertheless, lip somatosensory characteristics of patients with cleft lip after cheiloplasty have not yet been determined. The present study used magnetoencephalography to objectively evaluate the lip sensation in patients with unilateral cleft lip to establish a new objective evaluation method.
methodsParticipants were 15 patients with unilateral cleft lip after cheiloplasty (UCL group), and 30 healthy young subjects (control group). Five points of the upper and lower lips were stimulated electrically to measure somatosensory evoked magnetic fields (SEFs). The sources of the magnetic fields were modeled as single equivalent current dipoles (ECDs). ECDs located on the central sulcus by superimposition on magnetic resonance images were analyzed. Latency and intensity at 50-75 ms (cP60m) observed in the UCL group were compared with those in the control group. Thresholds of tactile stimuli in both groups were obtained using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments for subjective sensory evaluation.
resultsNo significant difference was found in the intensity of the cP60m or subjective evaluation between the groups. However, the latency of the cP60m was significantly longer in the upper lip of the UCL group than in the control group.
conclusionsSEFs showed a difference in lip sensation between the UCL group and the control group, suggesting that longer latency might be caused by the effects of surgical scarring on the neurotransmission pathway. These results suggest SEFs as useful for the objective evaluation of lip sensations. This study might improve future surgical procedures and lip functions of patients with cleft lip.
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.