ReviewDysphagia2022
Telepractice and Dysphagia Management: The Era of COVID-19 and Beyond.
Review in Dysphagia, 2022. 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.
- Asynchronous Telehealth for Dysphagia Management: Evidence, Possibilities, and Practical Examples.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2025Article
- The Feeding-swallowing Impact Survey: Reference Values from a UK Sample of Parents of Children Without a Known or Suspected Feeding Disorder.Dysphagia · 2025Article
- Barriers affecting the quality and consistency of barium studies in radiologists and registrars.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Development of an e-Health Software for Speech and Swallowing Rehabilitation Following Laryngectomy.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Early Feasibility of an Activity-Based Intervention for Improving Ingestive Functions in Older Adults with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ethical Challenges and Considerations in Dysphagia Management: A Scoping Review.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic drove rapid and widespread uptake of telepractice across all aspects of healthcare. The delivery of dysphagia care was no exception, with telepractice recognized as a service modality that could support social distancing/infection control, overcome service delivery challenges created by lockdowns/service closures, and address consumer concerns about attending in-person appointments. Now, almost two years since most services first rapidly deployed telepractice, it is time to reflect on the big picture, and consider how telepractice will continue as a service option that is sustained and integrated into mainstream dysphagia care. It is also timely to consider the research agenda needed to support this goal. To this end, in this paper we present 4 discussion topics, which raise key considerations for the current and future use of telepractice within adult and pediatric dysphagia services. These are (1) Dysphagia services must meet consumer and service needs; (2) Aspects of dysphagia services can be safely and reliably provided via telepractice; (3) Telepractice can be used in flexible ways to support the delivery of dysphagia services; and (4) Providing quality dysphagia services via telepractice requires planned implementation and evaluation. Then directions for future research are discussed. These considerations are presented to help shift perspectives away from viewing telepractice as simply a COVID-19 "interim-care solution". Rather, we encourage clinicians, services, and researchers to embrace a future of "integrated care", where traditional dysphagia services are combined with telepractice models, to enhance the quality of care provided to our clients.
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.