ArticleArchives of craniofacial surgery2026
Which intraoral parameters are prognostic factors for speech outcomes in incomplete cleft palate?
Article in Archives of craniofacial surgery, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe goal of cleft palate surgery is to improve speech articulation; however, factors predicting postoperative speech outcome remain unclear. This study aimed to identify anatomical parameters associated with speech outcome in patients with incomplete cleft palate.
methodsNinety-eight patients with incomplete cleft palate who underwent palatoplasty and completed long-term follow-up of more than 4 years were included. All surgeries were performed by a single senior surgeon, and eight intraoral parameters were consistently measured intraoperatively. Speech outcomes were evaluated at 4 years of age using the Pittsburgh Weighted Speech Scale (PWSS) and the Simple Speech Screening Protocol (SSSP). Pearson correlation analysis, Kruskal-Wallis test, and multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to assess associations between anatomical parameters and speech outcomes.
resultsMost parameters showed no significant correlation with PWSS or SSSP. However, a greater preoperative straight palatal length and a greater postoperative curved palatal length were significantly associated with lower PWSS scores (p< 0.05). In multivariable analysis, postoperative curved palatal length remained independently associated with PWSS, and palatal width also showed a significant association, with wider palate associated with poorer speech outcome (p< 0.05).
conclusionMost intraoral anatomical parameters were not independently associated with speech outcome, suggesting that factors beyond simple anatomical measurements-particularly those related to restoring appropriate velopharyngeal function, such as reconstruction of the levator veli palatini muscle-may play a more important role. Nevertheless, preoperative straight palatal length, postoperative curved palatal length, and palatal width demonstrated meaningful associations with speech outcome. Therefore, these parameters should be considered when planning palatoplasty to optimize postoperative speech outcome.
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.