ArticleJPRAS open2026
The ten test for facial sensory assessment: A scoping review.
Article in JPRAS open, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Practical and reliable assessment of facial sensation is critical in plastic and reconstructive surgery given its role in mastication, speech, and communication. The Ten Test (TT), a sensory assessment based on comparison between normal and affected sensation, emerged as an alternative to calibrated monofilaments and has been validated extensively in the upper extremity. The goal of this scoping review was to map the existing evidence regarding TT assessment of facial sensation and identify gaps that warrant further investigation. Seven relevant publications were identified, comprising five clinical studies and two descriptive sources. The TT was applied across a range of trigeminal nerve injuries including facial transplantation, iatrogenic nerve injury, and craniosynostosis to assess postoperative sensory recovery. Use extended to intraoral and intranasal mucosa in select contexts, and the TT also played a role in preoperative evaluation of corneal neurotization candidates. This review summarizes the findings and their clinical relevance, including barriers to validation and limitations of evidence, to help improve perioperative facial sensory assessment.
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.