ArticleDysphagia2025
'Without the Data You're Not Going to Know If It's Important or Not': A Mixed Methods Study on What Dysphagia Intervention Outcomes are Important to People with Parkinson's Disease and Family Members.
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.
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.
- Measuring What Matters in Parkinson's Disease Research and Dysphagia: The Need for Core Outcome Sets.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The lack of patient and public involvement in oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) intervention studies in Parkinson's disease (PD) can bias the choice of outcomes to be measured in these studies. This study aimed to obtain perspectives of individuals living with OD in PD and family members/caregivers on OD intervention outcomes that are important to them. This is part of a larger Core Outcome Set project. A mixed methods study with an international online cross-sectional survey and subsequent focus groups involving people with OD in PD and family members/caregivers was conducted. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Intervention outcomes rated most important, significantly different, inconclusive, or identified as missing in the survey were clarified in follow-up focus groups with seven previous survey participants. Focus group data were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed following inductive and deductive content analysis using NVivo. Twelve outcomes were rated as important by ≥ 80% of the 62 survey participants. The most important outcomes were penetration/aspiration and laryngeal sensation. Fear of choking was added as an important but missing intervention outcome. In the focus groups, findings from the survey were validated. Four content categories with eleven sub-categories were identified. OD intervention outcome priorities by people with OD in PD and family members/caregivers show only partial agreement with outcomes measured in published intervention studies on OD in PD. This highlights the importance of stakeholder involvement in the design and implementation of these studies to make findings relevant to all.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39644337What 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.