ArticleOTO open
Trends in Swallowing Outcomes Following Deintensified Treatment in Selected p16+ Oropharyngeal Carcinoma.
Article in OTO open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Identify trends in swallowing outcomes in p16+ oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy+surgery (NAC+S) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy+surgery+radiation (NAC+S+R). Study Design: Cohort study. Setting: Single academic institution. Methods: Swallowing outcome was measured using a validated questionnaire, MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI). MDADI scores were compared between NAC+S and NAC+S+R groups in short-term (<1 year), middle-term (1-3 years), and long-term (>3 years). Clinical factors associated with MDADI scores were explored using a linear mixed model. Statistical significance was established at Results: Sixty-seven patients met the inclusion criteria and were divided into 2 groups: NAC+S (57 [85.1%]) and NAC+S+R (10 [14.9%]). All patients had improved MDADI scores in the middle-term compared to short-term (NAC+S: score increase = 3.43, Conclusion: Regardless of treatment type, swallowing will likely be improved in the middle-term and long-term compared to the short-term. Patients treated with NAC+S+R will have worse short-term swallowing function. However, in the middle-term and long-term, there is no significant difference in swallowing function between patients treated with NAC+S and NAC+S+R.
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.