SynthesisDysphagia2024
Dysphagia Assessments as Criteria in the 'Decision-Making Process' for Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placement in People with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Dysphagia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rehabilitation in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Recommendations for Clinical Practice and Further Research.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Impact of weight loss and disease progression on survival in ALS: insights from a multidisciplinary care center.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To review the assessment methods of dysphagia as a criterion for the decision-making process for Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) placement in patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). Systematic review. A search was conducted in three databases (EMBASE, CINAHL, PUBMED) in December 2022 and updated in July 2023. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data. Study quality was appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools. Systematic review registration number in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42022385461. The searches identified 240 records. The 10 eligible studies included 2 case reports, 4 retrospective studies, 3 prospective studies, and 1 cohort observational study. Study quality was low, with most studies having moderate to high risk of bias. Dysphagia is a common criterion for decision-making. Dysphagia assessment is usually in the form of either self-reports, objective instrumental assessments, or both. Dysphagia is a common criterion for the decision-making process, yet is missing in clinical guidelines. Establishing the optimal means of dysphagia assessment is important for timely decision-making procedures, so that life-threatening consequences of dysphagia are minimized.
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.