ArticlePloS one2020
Analysis of clinical outcomes in elderly patients with impaired swallowing function.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral bioavailability of microdoses and therapeutic doses of midazolam as a 2-dimensionally printed orodispersible film in healthy volunteers.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Trial
- Risk factors for postoperative swallowing dysfunction in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery: A retrospective cohort study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Stroke-associated pneumonia in Japanese acute care settings: incidence and preliminary validation of risk prediction scores.BMC neurology · 2025Article
- Factors for Oral Intake Recovery in Acute Illness Patients With Dysphagia: A Prospective Cohort Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Eating and Drinking with Acknowledged Risks (EDAR) in Older Adults: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Clinicians in Japan and the UK.Dysphagia · 2025Article
- Observational
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Japan is the world's leading aging society, and increasing medical expenses for elderly people is an urgent issue. Since aspiration pneumonia in elderly people with impaired swallowing function is a huge problem in Japan, their expected long-term clinical course should be clarified. Accordingly, we collected data from 991 elderly (≥75 years old) patients whose swallowing function was evaluated by Kitasato Institute Hospital's speech therapists (January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2017). We analyzed the relationship between swallowing function and the subjects' long-term prognosis. To clarify the prognostic factors of patients with dysphagia, we obtained their clinical information (age, gender, activities of daily living, nutritional status, availability of alternative feeding pathways such as percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, and cognitive function). We confirmed 372 death cases and stratified the cases into three groups using Fujishima's swallowing ability grade, which is used to predict elderly people's real-world life expectancy. Results showed the median survival days were 331 and 952 days in Groups I (Grades 1-3, n = 308) and II (Grades 4-6, n = 153), respectively, whereas the median survival days for Group III (Grades 7-10, n = 530) could not be calculated. We conducted a multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model with Group I, which revealed that initial grade and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy were significant prognostic factors for the subjects' long-term survival. Nevertheless, further discussion is necessary, particularly to determine advanced care planning regarding indications for alternative feeding pathways in elderly patients with severe dysphagia, since percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy could significantly prolong their survival.
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.