ArticleScientific reports2020
Effects of cognitive and motor dual-tasks on oropharyngeal swallowing assessed with FEES in healthy individuals.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of a Neurogenic Dysphagia Outpatient Clinic on Diagnosis, Treatment, and Nutrition.European journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Article
- Cognitive decline limits compensatory resource allocation within the aged swallowing network.GeroScience · 2025Article
- Review
- Cortical activation characteristics during different swallowing tasks in post-stroke patients: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Validation of the DIGEST-FEES as a Global Outcome Measure for Pharyngeal Dysphagia in Parkinson's Disease.Dysphagia · 2024Article
- Systematic approach to contextualize findings of flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing in neurogenic dysphagia- towards an integrated FEES report.Neurological research and practice · 2024Review
- Association between the number of remaining teeth and disability-free life expectancy, and the impact of oral self-care in older Japanese adults: a prospective cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2022Article
- Swallowing performance during cognitive tasks in healthy adults.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dysphagia is frequent in many neurological diseases and gives rise to severe complications such as malnutrition, dehydration and aspiration pneumonia. Therefore, early detection and management of dysphagia is essential and can reduce mortality. This study investigated the effect of cognitive and motor dual-task interference on swallowing in healthy participants, as dual-task effects are reported for other motor tasks such as gait and speech. 27 participants (17 females; 29.2 ± 4.1 years) were included in this prospective study and examined using flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). Using a previously established FEES-based score, the paradigms "baseline swallowing", "cognitive dual-task" and "motor dual-task" were assessed. Scores of the three paradigms were compared using a repetitive measures ANOVA and post-hoc analysis. Mean baseline swallowing score in single task was 5 ± 3. It worsened to 6 ± 5 in the cognitive (p = 0.118), and to 8 ± 5 in the motor dual-task condition (p < 0.001). This change was driven by subclinical worsening of premature bolus spillage and pharyngeal residue. Oropharyngeal swallowing is not exclusively reflexive in nature but requires attention, which leads to motor dual-task interference. This has potential diagnostic and therapeutic implications, e.g. in the early screening for dysphagia or in avoiding dual-task situations while eating.
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.