ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2025
Exploring assessment measures including psychological aspects in adults with acquired Peripheral Facial Palsy (PFP): a scoping review.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGiven the lack of specific assessment measures and consensus on how to evaluate the psychological aspects of acquired peripheral facial palsy, this study aimed to identify the existing instruments in current use, as well as the key psychological domains considered. A secondary objective was to identify mental health-related areas not addressed or under-represented by those instruments.
methodA scoping review was conducted to identify assessment measures, their underlying dimensions, and frequency of use. Findings were thematically synthesized across specific areas and grouped by consensus among the three authors to identify key domains for evaluating facial palsy.
results46 instruments were identified, also capturing social and quality-of-life aspects often closely linked to psychological factors. Their dimensions were classified into five generic areas: health-related quality of life perception, symptomatology (emotional and physical), appearance-related matters, intrapersonal and social skills, and care experience. Analysis of the items led to the identification of specific areas, which were classified by relevance into six broader psychosocial domains: (1) social functioning, (2) emotional symptomatology, (3) facial palsy- related QoL, (4) general health-related QoL, (5) psychological functioning, and (6) care experience-satisfaction. The FDI, FaCE, followed by the SF-36, and HADS emerged as the most used instruments.
conclusionsThe results showed a lack of consensus due to the heterogeneity of the instruments retrieved for the evaluation of psychological outcomes. This review identified under-represented psychological areas, such as social and appearance-related anxiety, body self-perception, and experience of the care process which may warrant further evaluation. Several of the instruments retrieved were general rather than facial palsy-specific, which could not fully address the specific psychological needs of adults suffering with acquired peripheral facial palsy.
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.