Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33734825›Full record

SynthesisAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2021

Visualizing the Esophagus During Modified Barium Swallow Studies: A Systematic Review.

Erin L Reedy, Teri Lynn Herbert, Heather Shaw Bonilha

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Oesophageal fluoroscopy in adults-when and why?The British journal of radiology · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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.

Erin L ReedyHealth Sciences and Research, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Teri Lynn HerbertAcademic Affairs Faculty, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Heather Shaw BonilhaHealth Sciences and Research, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.

Funding

Proteomics CoreP30DK123704 · NIDDK · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI DON C. ROCKEY · 2020 to 2026
$8.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK123704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose Despite the emphasis on using evidence-based practice for patient care, as clinicians, we sometimes find that there is insufficient evidence to support our clinical practices. One example of this is the "contentious" inclusion of routine, standardized visualization of the esophagus during modified barium swallow studies (MBSSs). This review sought to investigate the evidence for inclusion of routine esophageal visualization during the MBSS, a practice that is supported by the long-established interrelationship between all aspects of the oral, pharyngeal, and esophageal swallowing continuum. Method Searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL databases. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed to identify articles that met prespecified inclusion and exclusion terms. Results Five articles were included in this review, which identified that esophageal findings were present in 48.67% of those participants whose MBSS included esophageal visualization. Conclusion This review supports a standardized, validated, reliable visualization protocol of the esophagus during the MBSS as a critical component to the accurate diagnosis and formulation of treatment recommendations for patients with swallowing disorders.

Indexed as

DeglutitionDeglutition DisordersBariumFluoroscopyHumansBarium

Identifiers

PMID33734825
PMCPMC8758321

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.