ArticleBMC geriatrics2023
Diagnostic accuracy of the 'Dysphagia Screening Tool for Geriatric Patients' (DSTG) compared to Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) for assessing dysphagia in hospitalized geriatric patients - a diagnostic study.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Oropharyngeal dysphagia as a neurogeriatric syndrome].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2026Review
- Article
- Diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in older patients : Consensus statement of the Working Group on Pneumology in Older Patients.Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2025Review
- Impact of Modified Diet, Swallowing Exercises, and Neuromuscular Electrostimulation on Severity of Oropharyngeal Dysphagia of Geriatric Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Combined systematic screening for malnutrition and dysphagia in hospitalized older adults: a scoping review.BMC geriatrics · 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOropharyngeal dysphagia is highly prevalent among hospitalized geriatric patients. The screening instruments used to date have been evaluated primarily in stroke patients. This diagnostic study aimed to validate a new screening instrument for oropharyngeal dysphagia, the 'Dysphagia Screening Tool for Geriatric Patients' (DSTG), as compared to one of the gold standards, flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). MATERIALS AND
methodsGeriatric inpatients admitted to five geriatric hospitals in Germany were consecutively evaluated using both DSTG and FEES in random order and by different evaluators blinded to the results of the other evaluation. In the FEES examination, a score of more than 3 on Rosenbek's Penetration Aspiration Scale was considered evidence of clinically relevant oropharyngeal dysphagia. Sensitivity, specificity and further measures of test performance were calculated for DSTG.
resultsThe 53 volunteers recruited were on average 85 years of age, 56.6% were women. Twenty patients (37.7%) were diagnosed with dysphagia using FEES. Of these, 12 were screened as positive on DSTG. Of the 33 FEES negative patients, 4 tested positive on DSTG. The following test parameters were calculated for DSTG: sensitivity: 0.60, 95% confidence interval [0.39 ; 0.78], specificity 0.88 [0.73 ; 0.95], positive predictive value 0.75 [0.51 ; 0.90], negative predictive value 0.78 [0.63 ; 0.89], positive likelihood ratio 4.95 [1.85 ; 13.27], negative likelihood ratio 0.46 [0.26 ; 0.79]. In a receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.77 [0.62 ; 0.91]. No adverse events occurred.
conclusionThe DSTG appears to be a valid instrument for screening of oropharyngeal dysphagia in geriatric inpatients.
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.