Observational studyCoDAS2025
Characterization of swallowing in older adults with dementia.
Observational study in CoDAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze swallowing in older adults with dementia through clinical evaluation at a referral center for elderly healthcare.
methodsRetrospective, cross-sectional, observational study with older people, stratified by the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). Characterization was based on data extracted from medical records, including functional, cognitive, and mood assessments. The clinical evaluation of swallowing consisted of food offered in three consistencies, analyzing 13 items and functional classification.
resultsThe sample included 149 older adults - 47 neurotypical (CDR 0), 37 with mild dementia (CDR 1), 40 with moderate dementia (CDR 2), and 25 with severe dementia (CDR 3). The groups differed significantly, indicating greater changes in swallowing according to the severity of dementia. For instance, CDR 3 had greater changes in oral spillage of liquids than CDR 0 (p=0.012*). Cough with solids and drop in oxygen saturation with liquids were greater in CDR 3 than in CDR 1 (p=0.039* and p=0.047*, respectively). CDR 3 also had a higher frequency of reduced laryngeal excursion with nectar than CDR 2 (p=0.044*). Only positive cervical auscultation with nectar showed greater change in CDR 2 than in CDR 1 (p=0.019*). Oral residue of solids had a greater change in CDR 1 than in CDR 0 (p=0.030*).
conclusionThe severity of dementia was associated with swallowing impairments, highlighting the need for specific interventions in this population.
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.