SynthesisDysphagia2020
Trends in Reporting of Swallowing Outcomes in Oropharyngeal Cancer Studies: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Dysphagia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Time to Onset of Dysphagia Following Head and Neck Radiation.Dysphagia · 2025Article
- Head and Neck Cancer: A Study on the Complex Relationship between QoL and Swallowing Function.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Systematic review of risk factors of postoperative dysphagia in patients with oral cancer.Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2022Article
- Long-Term Swallowing Outcome and Dysphagia in Advanced Staged Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas after Radiotherapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for dysphagia in head and neck cancer: a systematic review protocol using COSMIN methodology.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the last two decades, dysphagia is increasingly recognized as a significant short-term and long-term issue in oropharyngeal cancer patients. However, there remains a lack of standardization and agreement about reporting swallowing outcomes in studies that assess treatment outcomes in this population. A systematic review was performed following PRISMA Guidelines by searching Pubmed (MEDLINE) and Scopus. The inclusion criteria used included (1) prospective and retrospective clinical studies involving adult patients with oropharyngeal cancer, (2) reports swallowing outcomes, (3) English studies or studies with English translation, (4) full text retrievable and (5) publication between 1990 and 2016. 410 unique studies were identified, and 106 were analyzed. A majority (> 80%) of studies that reported swallowing outcomes were published after 2010. While 75.4% of studies reported subjective outcomes (e.g., patient-reported or clinician-reported outcome measures), only 30.2% of studies presented results of objective instrumental assessment of swallowing. The majority (61%) of studies reported short-term swallowing outcomes at 1 year or less, and only 10% of studies examined 5-year swallowing comes. One study examined late-dysphagia (> 10 years) in the oropharyngeal cancer population. Considerable heterogeneity remains in the reporting of swallowing outcomes after treatment of oropharyngeal cancer despite its importance for quality of life. Studies reporting long-term swallowing outcomes are lacking in the literature, and objective measures of swallowing function remain underutilized and nonstandardized.
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.