ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2025
A New, Portable Orofacial Manometer for Measuring Tongue Strength and Endurance in Children: Laboratory-Based Validity Study.
Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: An accurate tongue strength and endurance assessment is necessary for pediatric dysphagia. TongueFit is a new, portable orofacial manometer for measuring tongue strength and endurance and a game-based training app for children. Objective: This study aimed to test the validity of TongueFit compared with a standard manometer as the current gold standard for measuring air pressure. Methods: This laboratory study compared TongueFit and a standard manometer as the gold standard for measuring air pressure. This study was conducted in 3 different experimental conditions. The first experiment compared TongueFit and the standard manometer using a force tester (MCT-2150), with pressure controlled by MSatLite software. The second and third experiments involved 2-cm and 3-cm bulbs between the 2 devices. This study used Lin concordance correlation to measure the level of agreement. Results: There was a mean absolute difference of 0.005 kilopascals (kPa) between the TongueFit and the standard manometer (n=35, ρC=1). Statistical analysis showed perfect agreement correlation (ρC=1). By using the 2-cm bulb, TongueFit's mean was 0.007 kPa lower, also showing perfect agreement (ρC=1). Furthermore, using the 3-cm bulb, results showed almost perfect agreement (ρC=0.999) with the TongueFit's mean, which was 0.044 kPa lower. Conclusions: This study confirms the high validity of TongueFit as an orofacial manometer compared with a standard manometer, with negligible mean differences, as well as near-perfect and perfect agreement in the experiments. These results confirm that TongueFit is a valid and accurate tool for assessing tongue strength.
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.