Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29101012›Full record

SynthesisPhysiology & behavior2018

A review of swallow timing in the elderly.

Ashwini M Namasivayam-MacDonald, Carly E A Barbon, Catriona M Steele

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Physiology & behavior, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Age-defying swallowing.Frontiers in aging · 2025
    Review
  14. Normal values for swallow events during endoscopic evaluation of swallowing: a preliminary study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Swallow Reaction Time in Healthy Adults.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2023
    Article
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

3 authors.

Ashwini M Namasivayam-MacDonaldSwallowing Rehabilitation Research Laboratory, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute - University Health Network, Toronto, Canada; Adelphi University, Garden City, NY, USA. Electronic address: ANamaMac@adelphi.edu.
Carly E A BarbonSwallowing Rehabilitation Research Laboratory, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute - University Health Network, Toronto, Canada; Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Catriona M SteeleSwallowing Rehabilitation Research Laboratory, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute - University Health Network, Toronto, Canada; Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

Tongue-pressure timing for liquid flow detection and control in swallowingR01DC011020 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK · PI STEELE, CATRIONA MARGARET · 2010 to 2020
$2.9M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC011020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many studies evaluate dysphagia in elderly patients and compare their swallowing to younger controls to assess the degree of swallowing impairment. Previous research suggests that changes should be expected in swallowing due to aging, and these changes need to be considered when performing swallowing assessments. A systematic review was conducted to elucidate the timing of swallowing in healthy. A comprehensive multiengine literature search was conducted to find articles studying swallowing in the healthy elderly, which yielded 22,852 articles of which 11 were judged to be relevant. Only articles using videofluoroscopy as an assessment method for swallowing timing were included. The articles underwent detailed review for study quality and data extraction. The eleven studies contained data for 32 different parameters, and 10 of the 11 studies compared elderly subjects to a younger group. Timing measures from the studies were compiled for analysis. In general, bolus transit times do not appear to change with age. Of note, elderly subjects tended to have a significantly delayed swallow response times and longer duration of upper esophageal sphincter opening. Results showed a large degree of variability across studies for each of the timing measures. Confidence intervals for timing in healthy older participants were computed across studies. Potential sources of variation were identified, including methodological, stimulus-related and participant-related sources. The results suggests that aging affects only a few very specific swallowing timing parameters, and many parameters appear to be unaffected by aging. Therefore, significant differences from a young reference sample should be interpreted as dysphagia rather than normal changes due to aging.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsAgingDeglutitionHumansMiddle AgedReaction TimeDeglutitionDysphagiaElderlySwallowingSystematic reviewTiming

Identifiers

PMID29101012
PMCPMC5742298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.