ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
An Assessment of the Sensory Function in the Maxillofacial Region: A Dual-Case Pilot Study.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Trigeminal somatosensory-evoked potentials (TSEPs) provide valuable insight into neural responses to oral stimuli. This study investigates TSEP recording methods and their impact on interpreting results in clinical settings to improve the development process of neurostimulation-based therapies. The experiments and results presented here aim at identifying appropriate stimulation characteristics to design an active dental prosthesis capable of contributing to restoring the lost neurosensitive connection between the teeth and the brain. Two methods of TSEP acquisition, traditional and occluded, were used, each conducted by a different volunteer. Traditional TSEP acquisition involves stimulation at different sites with varying parameters to achieve a control base. In contrast, occluded TSEPs examine responses acquired under low- and high-force bite conditions to assess the influence of periodontal mechanoreceptors and muscle activation on measurements. Traditional TSEPs demonstrated methodological feasibility with satisfactory results despite a limited subject pool. However, occluded TSEPs presented challenges in interpreting results, with responses deviating from expected norms, particularly under high force conditions, due to the simultaneous occurrence of stimulation and dental occlusion. While traditional TSEPs highlight methodological feasibility, the occluded approach highlights complexities in outcome interpretation and urges caution in clinical application. Previously unreported results were achieved, which underscores the importance of conducting further research with larger sample sizes and refined protocols in order to strengthen the reliability and validity of TSEP assessments.
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.