ArticleDysphagia2018
Differential Response Pattern of Oropharyngeal Pressure by Bolus and Dry Swallows.
Article in Dysphagia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using Machine Learning for the Automated Segmentation and Detection of Swallows Obtained by Digital Cervical Auscultation in Preterm Neonates.Dysphagia · 2026Article
- Use of Transfer Learning for the Automated Segmentation and Detection of Swallows via Digital Cervical Auscultation in Children.Dysphagia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine if bolus and dry swallow showed similar pressure changes in the oropharynx using our newly developed device. A unique character of it includes that baropressure can be measured with the sensor being placed in the balloon and can assess the swallowing mechanics in terms of pressure changes in the oropharynx with less influences of direct contacts of boluses and oropharyngeal structures during swallow indirectly. Fifteen healthy subjects swallowed saliva (dry), 15 ml of water, 45 ml of water, and 15 ml of two different types of food in terms of viscosity (potage soup-type and mayonnaise-type foods). Suprahyoid muscle activity was recorded simultaneously. Three parameters, area under the curve (AUC), peak amplitude, and duration of pressure, were analyzed from each swallow. Almost all of the bolus swallowing events had biphasic baropressure responses consisting of an early phase and late phase (99%), whereas 90% of the saliva swallowing events had a single phase. AUC, peak, and duration displayed greater effects during the late phase than during the early phase. Baropressure of the early phase, but not of the late phase, significantly increased with increasing volume; however, small but significant viscosity effects on pressure were seen during both phases. Peak pressure of the late phase was preceded by maximum muscle activity, whereas that of the early phase was seen when muscle activity displayed a peak response. These findings indicated that our device with the ability to measure baropressure has the potential to provide additional parameter to assess the swallow physiology, and biphasic baropressure responses in the early and late phases could reflect functional aspects of the swallowing reflexes.
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.