ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2024
Criterion (Concurrent) Validity and Clinical Utility of the Tongueometer Device.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correlation of Tongue Strength and Endurance with Overjet and Overbite in Angle Class I Malocclusion: A Study in Deutero Malay Race Ages 9-12 Years.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Sensor Technologies for Measuring Tongue Biomechanics Relevant to Swallowing: A Narrative Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Test-Retest Reliability of Remote Assessments in Patients With Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1.Neurology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTongue manometry (i.e., tongue pressure measurement) is a commonly used assessment for patients with suspected oral-motor involvement in swallowing disorders. Availability of lingual manometry has changed in recent years, with the introduction of the Tongueometer device being a more affordable tongue manometry system. The purpose of this study was to test concurrent (criterion) validity of the Tongueometer compared to the current standard reference device, the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI).
methodAdults without dysphagia were recruited for participation in this study. Standard lingual measurements (swallowing-related pressures, maximum isometric pressure [MIP], and maximum isometric endurance) were recorded, with the bulb anteriorly placed, with both devices, in a randomized order. The Bland-Altman method was used to determine concurrent (criterion) validity of these measurements compared to the clinical standard IOPI device. A recently available suggested corrective value by Curtis et al. (2023) was also applied, with comparisons made between devices both with and without the Curtis correction.
resultsThe final sample included 70 adult participants aged 20-89 years (
conclusionsThe Tongueometer lingual measurements were consistently lower compared to the IOPI. Clinical use of values taken with the Tongueometer device should be compared to normative data published for each specific device. Available features of each device (e.g., display, bulb texture, technology/application) should be considered when selecting which device to use with an individual patient.
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.