Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31372756›Full record

SynthesisDysphagia2020

Interventions for Feeding and Swallowing Disorders in Adults with Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review of the Evidence.

Beatrice Manduchi, Gina Marni Fainman, Margaret Walshe

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Dysphagia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Beatrice ManduchiDepartment of Clinical Speech and Language Studies, Trinity College Dublin, 7-9 South Leinster Street, Dublin 2, D02KF66, Ireland. manduchb@tcd.ie.ORCID 0000-0001-8953-8373
Gina Marni FainmanDepartment of Clinical Speech and Language Studies, Trinity College Dublin, 7-9 South Leinster Street, Dublin 2, D02KF66, Ireland.
Margaret WalsheDepartment of Clinical Speech and Language Studies, Trinity College Dublin, 7-9 South Leinster Street, Dublin 2, D02KF66, Ireland.
Trinity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feeding and swallowing disorders are prevalent in adults with Intellectual Disability (ID) and can potentially lead to discomfort, malnutrition, dehydration, aspiration, and choking. Most common interventions include: diet modification, compensatory strategies, swallowing therapy, and non-oral feeding. Despite their common use, the research evidence for these interventions is lacking. The current study aimed to systematically review the evidence for the safety and the effectiveness of interventions for feeding and swallowing disorders in adults with ID. Seven electronic databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant studies were reviewed from online availability to March 2019, with no language restrictions. Eligibility criteria encompassed experimental or non-experimental study design, adults (> 18 years) with ID and feeding and/or swallowing disorders (any etiology and severity) and any intervention for feeding and/or swallowing disorders. Methodological quality was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Downs and Black checklist. Four articles met the inclusion criteria. All included studies considered enteral feeding as an intervention strategy and had a retrospective observational design. Overall, included studies reported positive change in nutritional status and a high incidence of adverse events following enteral feeding initiation. Risk of bias was high with variability in methodological quality. The safety and effectiveness of interventions for feeding and swallowing in adults with ID is unclear. This review highlights the lack of evidence-based practice in this area. Directions for further research are provided. Before enteral feeding initiation, risks and benefits should be appropriately balanced on an individual basis, and caregivers should be involved in the decision-making process.

Indexed as

AdultDeglutition DisordersEnteral NutritionFeeding and Eating DisordersFemaleHumansIntellectual DisabilityMaleNutritional StatusNutrition TherapyObservational Studies as TopicRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeDeglutitionDysphagiaFeedingIntellectual disabilityInterventionSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID31372756
OpenAlexW2966223361

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.