ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
Development, Validity, and Test Reliability and Reproducibility of Facial Palsy-Associated Facial Movement: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Facial palsy impairs facial muscle function, impacting both physical and psychosocial well-being. Existing assessment tools often lack sensitivity or functional comprehensiveness. This study aimed to develop and validate a novel facial palsy functional assessment scale (FPFAS) to address these limitations. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1 involved item generation through literature review, expert interviews, and patient input to identify key functional domains. In Phase 2, content validation was performed using the Delphi technique with a panel of eight clinical experts, evaluating item relevance and clarity. The finalized scale was then subjected to test-retest reliability analysis in 48 patients with facial palsy over a three-day interval. Results: The FPFAS demonstrated excellent content validity, with a scale-level content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) of 0.97. Test-retest reliability was high, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.893, indicating strong consistency. Cronbach's alpha of 0.999 further supported the scale's internal reliability. Conclusion: The FPFAS is a valid and reliable tool for assessing functional impairments in facial palsy. Its comprehensive, patient-centered approach offers a significant improvement over existing grading systems. Further research is recommended to evaluate construct validity and clinical responsiveness.
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.