ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2025
Comparison of filter-based and software-based image enhancement systems for endoscopic swallowing diagnostics: a head-to-head study.
Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFlexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is a gold standard for diagnosing swallowing disorders. This study investigates two image enhancement technologies usable in FEES-hardware filtering (Narrow Band Imaging, NBI
methodsThis Head-to-head study compared NBI
resultsThe study used a point system to assess subjective image quality, color intensity, and contrast to the mucosa. Both systems produced similar hues for yellow and red and their secondary colors. PIET was preferred for red and purple, while NBI was favored for yellow, green, and orange. For blue, black, and white (all showing no intensification), PIET was nearly unanimously chosen. Raters agreed 100% on the maximum visible dilution, showing no significant difference between systems; both enhanced visibility tenfold.
conclusionsBoth image enhancement systems improved the visibility of specific food dyes effectively. Each method has distinct advantages. The choice between them depends on personal preference and available systems.
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.