ArticleBrain sciences2023
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in the Differential Diagnosis of Unilateral Peripheral Facial Nerve Palsy.
Article in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: This study aims to assess the diagnostic accuracy of parameters based on a combination of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and electrical stimulation (ES) in the differentiation between idiopathic and secondary facial palsy in a large cohort of patients. (2) Methods: Patients with unilateral facial palsy ≤7 days after symptom onset were included. Compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitudes were measured after stimulation of both facial nerves at (A) the internal acoustic meatus using TMS, CMAP-TMS, and (B) at the stylomastoid foramen using electrical stimulation, CMAP-ES. To express the degree of nerve dysfunction in the facial canal specifically, the amplitude reduction of the CMAP-TMS in relation to CMAP-ES was calculated and expressed as a percentage (amplitude reduction over the facial canal, ARFC). Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ARFC as a marker to discriminate between patients with idiopathic and secondary facial palsy. (3) Results: Data from 498 patient records were analyzed. Idiopathic facial palsy was diagnosed in 424 patients, and secondary facial palsy in 74 patients. The area under the ROC curve for ARFC was 0.398. (4) Conclusions: The overall diagnostic accuracy of this method to differentiate secondary from idiopathic facial palsy is low.
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.