ArticleArquivos de neuro-psiquiatria2024
Sensitivity and specificity of the EAT-10 and SDQ-DP in identifying the risk of dysphagia in Parkinson's disease.
Article in Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria, 2024. 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, 1 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe early identification of risk for dysphagia in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) is essential for the prevention of nutritional and pulmonary complications.
objectiveTo analyze the sensitivity and specificity of the Swallowing Disturbance Questionnaire (SDQ-PD) and the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) in identifying dysphagia risk in patients with early and intermediate stages of PD.
methodsTwenty-nine patients with PD participated in the study. EAT-10 and SDQ-PD questionnaires were applied, and a videofluoroscopic swallowing study. Dysphagia Outcome and Severity Scale (DOSS) was used to classify the presence and severity of dysphagia, and the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) was used to identify the presence of penetration/aspiration. In the statistical analysis, the sensitivity and specificity of the risk questionnaires were calculated, as well as positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy.
resultsEAT-10 to identify the risk of penetration/aspiration revealed a sensitivity of 71.42% and specificity of 45.45%; in the identification of the presence of dysphagia, the sensitivity was 47.61%, and the specificity was 12.5%. The SDQ-PD questionnaire for risk of penetration/aspiration demonstrated a sensitivity of 28.57%, and a specificity of 68.18%. In terms of identifying the presence of dysphagia, the sensitivity was 20%, while the specificity was 44.44%.
conclusionThe SDQ-PD revealed low sensitivity and low specificity to identify the presence of dysphagia and/or penetration/aspiration in patients with early and intermediate stages of PD in this sample. Despite its low specificity, the EAT-10 exhibited good sensitivity in indicating the risk of penetration/aspiration.
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.