Observational studyDysphagia2023
Impact of Quantitative Videofluoroscopic Swallowing Measures on Clinical Interpretation and Recommendations by Speech-Language Pathologists.
Observational study in Dysphagia, 2023. 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Swallowing disorders in cerebral palsy: a systematic review of oropharyngeal Dysphagia, nutritional impact, and health risks.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2025Pooled it
- Dysphagia Phenotypes in COVID-19 Pneumonia Versus Aspiration Pneumonia: A Retrospective Quantitative Videofluoroscopic Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Automated identification of bolus types in modified barium swallow studies using deep learning: a preliminary study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and image processing framework for automated airway invasion detection and residue classification from swallowing endoscopy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Impact of Tracheostomy on Dysphagia in Children.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- An intelligent quantitative analysis software for videofluoroscopic swallowing study in patients with dysphagia.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Analysis of Patients' Dietary Status/Restrictions Following Instrumental Swallow Evaluations in Skilled Nursing Facilities.Dysphagia · 2025Article
- Features of Swallowing Function in Sporadic Inclusion Body Myositis: Preliminary Evidence Using Well-Tested Assessment Frameworks.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2024Article
- Prediction of Pharyngeal 3D Volume Using 2D Lateral Area Measurements During Swallowing.Dysphagia · 2024Article
- Normal values for swallow events during endoscopic evaluation of swallowing: a preliminary study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024Article
- User-centred design, validation and clinical testing of an anti-choking mug for people with Parkinson's disease.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantitative measures are available for adult videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) analysis but are yet to be seen routinely in clinical practice. This study explores agreement between traditional observational analysis and quantitative analysis, and the impact of analytical approaches on subsequent diagnosis and recommendations. One hundred adults referred for VFSSs with swallowing concerns were administered a standardised VFSS protocol. All VFSSs were analysed using three approaches: (1) a traditional observational analysis typically used by treating speech-language pathologists (SLPs), (2) quantitative analysis by two independent raters, and (3) binary subjective analysis by 11 independent raters. Three metrics were focussed on; pharyngeal constriction (PC), hyoid displacement (Hmax) and pharyngoesophageal segment opening (PESmax). All raters were blinded to others' ratings. Treating SLPs using traditional observational analysis were provided with no instructions. Quantitative analysis used published Leonard and Kendall digital displacement measures. Binary subjective analysis involved rating each VFSS as normal versus impaired for the three metrics above. Treating SLPs using traditional observational analysis and quantitative analysis raters independently provided diagnostics and treatment plans. PC, Hmax and PESmax achieved fair agreement (Kappa = 0.33-0.36) between binary subjective analysis compared to substantial agreement (ICC = 0.77-0.94) for quantitative analysis. Reports of impairment were significantly lower in the traditional observational and binary subjective analyses compared with studies rated using the quantitative analysis (p < 0.05). Consequently, this resulted in significantly less rehabilitation recommendations when traditional observational analysis was used in comparison to the quantitative analysis. Quantitative measures to analyse VFSSs can be used in clinical practice producing increased inter-rater agreement and supporting more targeted rehabilitation recommendations than using a traditional observational VFSS analysis alone.
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.