Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42729873›Full record

ArticleJPRAS open2026

The ten test for facial sensory assessment: A scoping review.

Adi M Friedman, Gregory H Borschel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Adi M FriedmanIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Gregory H BorschelIndiana University Health, Indianapolis, IN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

corneal neurotizationCranial vault reconstructionFacial sensationFacial transplantationNerve graftNerve injuryNerve recoveryNerve repairSensory assessmentSensory nerve injuryTen testTrigeminal nerveTrigeminal reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID42729873
PMCPMC13564054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.