ArticleRevista Cuidarte
Model based on clinical characteristics to identify patients with neurogenic oropharyngeal dysphagia.
Article in Revista Cuidarte. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Neurogenic oropharyngeal dysphagia is a form of functional dysphagia usually caused by neurological and neuromuscular diseases, which produces several secondary complications. To improve its detection and characterization, models are emerging that integrate clinical variables to complement the physical examination of swallowing. Objective: Develop an explanatory model to differentiate patients with neurogenic oropharyngeal dysphagia. Materials and Methods: Case control study based on a set ofdata derived from the clinical examination of swallowing with neurological emphasis carried out in a sample of patients with neurogenic oropharyngeal dysphagia of neurological and neuromuscular causes (cases), and in healthy people (controls). Results: 158 clinical variables were compared between both groups, where those with the greatest classification capacity were identified, integrated into an explanatory binary logistic regression model made up of nine variables: two history, two symptoms, three physical examination signs and two signs after consistency/volume test with food. The dependent variable was the category of being healthy or patient and the covariates were the clinical variables. Parameters reached by the model: Akaike information criterion 102 and Nagelkerke R2 0.78. Discussion: The nine variables that entered the model, together, largely explain the presence of neurogenic oropharyngeal dysphagia, and are accessible by physical examination of swallowing. Conclusions: The model obtained can improve and/or complement the evaluation process carried out in patients with dysphagia of functional causes, neurological and neuromuscular diseases, in screening and diagnostic characterization processes.
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.