ArticleDysphagia2021
Is Dysphagia Under Diagnosed or is Normal Swallowing More Variable than We Think? Reported Swallowing Problems in People Aged 18-65 Years.
Article in Dysphagia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global epidemiology of paralytic shellfish poisoning: a systematic search literature review.The Lancet. Planetary health · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Prevalence of Self-Reported Swallowing Difficulties and Swallowing-Related Quality of Life Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in India.Dysphagia · 2024Article
- Sodium-based paracetamol: impact on blood pressure, cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality.European heart journal · 2023Article
- Article
- Observational
- The Neuroprotective Effect of Tea Polyphenols on the Regulation of Intestinal Flora.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDysphagia prevalence in younger community dwelling adults and across nations is sparse. We investigated the prevalence of swallowing problems in an unselected cohort of people aged 18-65 years.
methodsThe EAT-10 Assessment Tool was converted into an anonymized online survey. Invitations were e-mailed to author contacts and onwards dispersal encouraged. Analysis was performed using non-parametric test for group comparison (Mann-Whitney U) and Spearman's rho correlation.
resultsFrom March 2014 to October 2017: 2054 responses (32 reported ages outside of 18-65 or undeclared) from Africa, Asia, Australasia/Oceania, Europe, and North and South America. Responses: 1,648 female, 364 male, (10 reported as both), median age 34, (range 18-65, mean 37.12, SD 12.40) years. Total EAT-10 scores: median 0 (range 0-36, mean 1.57, SD 3.49). EAT-10 score ≥ 3 (337) median 5 (range 3-36, mean 7.02 SD 5.91). Median age 36 (range 19-65, mean 37.81, SD 13.21) years. Declared sex was not statistically significantly associated with non-pathological vs. pathological EAT-10 score (p = 0.665). Female scores (median 0.00, mean 1.56, SD 3.338) were significantly higher than for males (median 0.00, mean 1.62, SD 4.161): U (Nfemale = 1648, Nmale = 364) = 275,420.000, z = - 2.677, p = 0.007. Age and EAT-10 score were not associated: females r
conclusionConcerns regarding swallowing exist in people undiagnosed with dysphagia, who may feel uncomfortable seeking professional help. Dysphagia may be under reported resulting in a hidden population. Subtle changes are currently seen as subtle markers of COVID-19. Further work is required to ensure that what is an essentially normal swallow does not become medicalized.
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.