SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025
Risk prediction models for dysphagia after radiotherapy among patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. 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.
- Review
- Evaluation of Swallowing Function and Aspiration in Newly Diagnosed Head and Neck Cancer Patients.Dysphagia · 2026Article
- Risk factors and prediction model of dysphagia in patients with recent small subcortical infarct.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Development and External Validation of an Explainable Machine Learning Model to Identify Positive Dysphagia Screening Results in People with Dementia: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
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
Background: Predictive models can identify patients at risk and thus enable personalized interventions. Despite the increasing number of prediction models used to predict the risk of dysphagia after radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC), there is still uncertainty about the effectiveness of these models in clinical practice and about the quality and applicability of future studies. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate and analyze all predictive models used to predict dysphagia in patients with HNC after radiotherapy. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase and Web of Science databases were searched from database establishment to August 31, 2024. Data from selected studies were extracted using predefined tables and the quality of the predictive modelling studies was assessed using the PROBAST tool. Meta-analysis of the predictive performance of the model was performed using the "metafor" package in R software. Results: Twenty-five models predicting the risk of dysphagia after radiotherapy in patients with HNC were included, covering a total of 8,024 patients. Common predictors include mean dose to pharyngeal constrictor muscles, treatment setting, and tumor site. Of these models, most were constructed based on logistic regression, while only two studies used machine learning methods. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) reported values for these models ranged from 0.57 to 0.909, with 13 studies having a combined AUC value of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74-0.81). All studies showed a high risk of bias as assessed by the PROBAST tool. Conclusion: Most of the published prediction models in this study have good discrimination. However, all studies were considered to have a high risk of bias based on PROBAST assessments. Future studies should focus on large sample size and rigorously designed multicenter external validation to improve the reliability and clinical applicability of prediction models for dysphagia after radiotherapy for HNC. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42024587252.
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.