ArticleDysphagia2025
Kinematic Measurements of Swallowing by Ultrasound: A Scoping Review.
Article in Dysphagia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Validity and Reliability of Ultrasound Assessment of Swallowing Function: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultrasound (US) is a non-invasive method used to study the kinematics of the swallowing function. Kinematic measurements are reported in studies evaluating swallowing using US, but there is no standardization. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and characterize the kinematic measurements of swallowing obtained by ultrasound. We followed the methodological recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and the reporting guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The research question followed the acronym PCC (population, concept, and context). Seven databases and gray literature were searched. Studies were selected using a blind, paired, and independent method. Data were extracted using a standardized tool. There were 2591 studies and 42 were eligible. Most studies had samples of less than 30 participants and mostly included healthy young adults and older people. The swallowing tasks during the assessments were not standardized. The most commonly studied measures were hyoid displacement and tongue movement during swallowing. However, there is no consensus between studies on the definition of the measures and the procedures for ultrasound assessment, including image acquisition and analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39446215What 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.