Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30742198›Full record

Observational studyJAMA neurology2019

Development and Validation of a Prognostic Model of Swallowing Recovery and Enteral Tube Feeding After Ischemic Stroke.

Marian Galovic, Anne Julia Stauber, Natascha Leisi, Werner Krammer, Florian Brugger, Jochen Vehoff, Philipp Balcerak, Anna Müller, Marlise Müller, Jochen Rosenfeld and 20 more

Abstract readObservational StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JAMA neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Risk factors and prediction model of dysphagia in patients with recent small subcortical infarct.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

30 authors.

Marian GalovicDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Anne Julia StauberDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Natascha LeisiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Werner KrammerDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Florian BruggerDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Jochen VehoffDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Philipp BalcerakDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Anna MüllerDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Marlise MüllerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Jochen RosenfeldDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Alexandros PolymerisNeurology and Stroke Centre, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Sebastian ThilemannNeurology and Stroke Centre, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Gian Marco De MarchisNeurology and Stroke Centre, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Thorsten NiemannNeurology and Stroke Centre, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Maren LeifkeNeurology and Stroke Centre, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Philippe LyrerNeurology and Stroke Centre, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Petra SaladinDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland.
Timo KahlesDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland.
Krassen NedeltchevDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland.
Hakan SarikayaDepartment of Neurology, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Simon JungDepartment of Neurology, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Urs FischerDepartment of Neurology, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Concetta MannoStroke Center, Department of Neurology, Neurocenter of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale Civico, Lugano, Switzerland.
Carlo W CeredaStroke Center, Department of Neurology, Neurocenter of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale Civico, Lugano, Switzerland.
Josemir W SanderNational Institute for Health Research University College London (UCL) Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, Department of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, England.
Barbara TettenbornDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Bruno J WederDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Sandro J StoeckliDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Marcel ArnoldDepartment of Neurology, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Georg KägiDepartment of Neurology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Predicting the duration of poststroke dysphagia is important to guide therapeutic decisions. Guidelines recommend nasogastric tube (NGT) feeding if swallowing impairment persists for 7 days or longer and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement if dysphagia does not recover within 30 days, but, to our knowledge, a systematic prediction method does not exist. Objective: To develop and validate a prognostic model predicting swallowing recovery and the need for enteral tube feeding. Design, Setting, and Participants: We enrolled participants with consecutive admissions for acute ischemic stroke and initially severe dysphagia in a prospective single-center derivation (2011-2014) and a multicenter validation (July 2015-March 2018) cohort study in 5 tertiary stroke referral centers in Switzerland. Exposures: Severely impaired oral intake at admission (Functional Oral Intake Scale score <5). Main Outcomes and Measures: Recovery of oral intake (primary end point, Functional Oral Intake Scale ≥5) or return to prestroke diet (secondary end point) measured 7 (indication for NGT feeding) and 30 (indication for PEG feeding) days after stroke. Results: In total, 279 participants (131 women [47.0%]; median age, 77 years [interquartile range, 67-84 years]) were enrolled (153 [54.8%] in the derivation study; 126 [45.2%] in the validation cohort). Overall, 64% (95% CI, 59-71) participants failed to recover functional oral intake within 7 days and 30% (95% CI, 24-37) within 30 days. Prolonged swallowing recovery was independently associated with poor outcomes after stroke. The final prognostic model, the Predictive Swallowing Score, included 5 variables: age, stroke severity on admission, lesion location, initial risk of aspiration, and initial impairment of oral intake. Predictive Swallowing Score prediction estimates ranged from 5% (score, 0) to 96% (score, 10) for a persistent impairment of oral intake on day 7 and from 2% to 62% on day 30. Model performance in the validation cohort showed a discrimination (C statistic) of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.76-0.91; P < .001) for predicting the recovery of oral intake on day 7 and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.87; P < .001) on day 30, and a discrimination for a return to prestroke diet of 0.94 (day 7; 95% CI, 0.87-1.00; P < .001) and 0.71 (day 30; 95% CI, 0.61-0.82; P < .001). Calibration plots showed high agreement between the predicted and observed outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: The Predictive Swallowing Score, available as a smartphone application, is an easily applied prognostic instrument that reliably predicts swallowing recovery. It will support decision making for NGT or PEG insertion after ischemic stroke and is a step toward personalized medicine.

Indexed as

Recovery of FunctionAgedAged, 80 and overBrain IschemiaCohort StudiesDeglutitionDeglutition DisordersEnteral NutritionFemaleGastrostomyHumansIntubation, GastrointestinalMaleMiddle AgedMobile ApplicationsPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID30742198
PMCPMC6515605

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.