ArticleDysphagia2018
Accuracy of a Laryngopharyngeal Endoscopic Esthesiometer (LPEER) for Evaluating Laryngopharyngeal Mechanosensitivity: A Validation Study in a Prospectively Recruited Cohort of Patients.
Article in Dysphagia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Upper Airway Sensory Testing in Dysphagia - Implications for Clinical Practice and Future Research Directions.Dysphagia · 2025Pooled it
- Age-related changes in oral sensitivity, taste and smell.Scientific reports · 2022Observational
- Evaluation methods and influencing factors of cough sensitivity.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Recent studies have shown an association between alterations in laryngopharyngeal mechanosensitivity (LPMS) and dysphagia, obstructive sleep apnea, and chronic cough hypersensitivity syndrome. A previous reliability study of a new laryngopharyngeal endoscopic esthesiometer and rangefinder (LPEER) showed high intra- and inter-rater reliability; however, its accuracy has not been tested. We performed an accuracy study of the LPEER in a prospectively and consecutively recruited cohort of 118 patients at two tertiary care university hospitals. Most of the patients were suffering from dysphagia, and all of them underwent a standard clinical evaluation and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST) using a new sensory testing protocol. The sensory test included determinations of the laryngeal adductor reflex threshold (LART), the cough reflex threshold (CRT) and the gag reflex threshold (GRT). Abnormalities on these reflex thresholds were evaluated for associations with major alterations in swallowing safety (pharyngeal residues, penetration, and aspiration). We evaluated the discriminative capacity of the LPMS test using ROC curves and the area under the curve (AUC-ROC) and its relationship with the eight-point penetration-aspiration scale (PAS) using the Spearman's ρ correlation coefficient (SCC). We found a positive correlation between the PAS and LART (SCC 0.47; P < 0.001), CRT (SCC 0.46; P < 0.001) and GRT (SCC 0.34; P = 0.002). The AUC-ROC values for detecting a PAS ≥7 were as follows: LART, 0.83 (P < 0.0001); CRT, 0.79 (P < 0.0001); GRT, 0.72 (P < 0.0001). In this study, the LPEER showed good accuracy for evaluating LPMS. These results justify further validation studies in independent populations.
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.