ArticleThe South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings2021
Contextualising clinical reasoning within the clinical swallow evaluation: A scoping review and expert consultation.
Article in The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Weighing up the pros and cons of dysphagia triage in South Africa.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2023Article
- The Use of an Iterative Strategy of Cognitive Interview and Expert Consultation to Revise the Quality of Life Scale for Patients with Aplastic Anemia (QLS-AA).Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- Challenges to infection control in early communication intervention: A scoping review.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study explored the available literature on the phenomenon of clinical reasoning and described its influence on the clinical swallow evaluation. By exploring the relationship between clinical reasoning and the clinical swallow evaluation, it is possible to modernise the approach to dysphagia assessment.
objectivesThis study aimed to contextualise the available literature on clinical reasoning and the CSE to low-middle income contexts through the use of a scoping review and expert consultation.
methodA scoping review was performed based on the PRISMA-ScR framework. The data was analysed using thematic analysis. Articles were considered if they discussed the clinical swallow evaluation and clinical reasoning, and were published in the last 49 years.
resultsThrough rigorous electronic and manual searching, 12 articles were identified. This review made an argument for the value of clinical reasoning within the clinical swallow evaluation. The results of the study revealed three core themes related to the acquisition, variability and positive impact of clinical reasoning in the clinical swallow evaluation.
conclusionThe results of this review showed that the clinical swallow evaluation is a complex process with significant levels of variability usually linked to the impact of context. This demonstrates that in order to deliver effective and relevant services, despite challenging conditions, healthcare practitioners must depend on clinical reasoning to make appropriate modifications to the assessment process that considers these salient factors.
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.