ArticleCoDAS2025
MMBGR protocol - diagnostic accuracy of clinical examination in infants.
Article in CoDAS, 2025. 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.
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo present the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination with scores, the Orofacial Myofunctional Evaluation Protocol MMBGR for Infants and Preschoolers, for the age group of six to 23 months.
methodsDiagnostic accuracy validation using a convenience sample. Images from 76 participants were analyzed by groups of three speech-language pathologists, who individually and separately assessed the images, with agreement between two of them considered valid. An electronic form was used to assess the domains of the orofacial myofunctional evaluation, Orofacial Myofunctional Disorder (OMD), and the need for referrals. The responses of speech-language pathologists who provided opinions based on clinical experience, without using the protocol (gold standard), were compared with those provided by speech-language pathologists who used the protocol (index test). The Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (ROC) method was employed, and cut-off points were assigned using the R Core Team (2022) software, yielding sensitivity and specificity values.
resultsFor infants aged six to 11 months, diagnostic accuracy was not ideal for orofacial structures, orofacial functions, and Orofacial Myofunctional Disorder (OMD), but reasonable for tone (70%). For infants aged 12 to 23 months, accuracy was reasonable for most domains- orofacial structures, orofacial functions, tone-and ideal for OMD (88.9%). The OMD cut-off point is 9 (for ages 6 to 11 months) and 14 (for ages 12 to 23 months). Accuracy was reasonable for multidisciplinary referrals but not ideal for speech-language pathology referrals.
conclusionThe Orofacial Myofunctional Evaluation Protocol MMBGR for Infants and Preschoolers, when analyzed through photos and videos, is accurate for assessing infants aged six to 11 months only in terms of tone; and for infants aged 12 to 23 months, it is accurate across all exam domains, being ideal for diagnosing OMD. The instrument is reasonable for determining the need for multidisciplinary referrals in infants.
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.