ArticleDysphagia2025
Compensatory Swallowing Strategies Recommended in Oncology Practice: Practice Patterns and Relationship to Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) Grades.
Article in Dysphagia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Compensatory swallow strategies are recommended to improve swallow safety and efficiency; however, there is limited evidence on use in specific populations or their relationship to swallow study results. We sought to describe/explore strategy recommendations in an oncology practice and their relationship to Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) grades as a marker of clinical utility of the tool. This is a sub-study of a STARI-guided retrospective implementation evaluation at a single comprehensive cancer center. Electronic health record databases were queried to sample all modified barium swallow studies (MBS) for all adult oncology patients from 2016 to 2021, excluding total laryngectomy, leak studies and those with missing DIGEST grades. For patients with multiple MBS studies across the study period, one MBS was randomly selected to be included in the analytic sample. DIGEST grade, diet recommendation, oncologic details, and swallow strategy details were chart abstracted. Strategies and oral intake recommendations were classified from least to most restrictive. This study included 4570 patients representing diverse oncology populations (46% head and neck). DIGEST grades indicating at least mild dysphagia (grades ≥ 1) were reported in 2486 of MBS (54%). Strategies were recommended in 2028 MBS (44%). As DIGEST grade increased so did strategy utilization and complexity (Spearman's r (r
Indexed as
Identifiers
39827333What 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.