ArticlePloS one2025
Comparative evaluation of the utility of two oral examination tools in assessing oral health in stroke patients with indwelling gastric tubes.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of probiotic colonization on oral hygiene and ventilator-associated pneumonia in ICU patients: a triple-blind randomized controlled trial.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Trial
- Oral Health Care for Post-Stroke Dysphagia Patients: A Systematic Review of Best Evidence.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo identify the scale that is more suitable for oral health assessment in stroke patient population with indwelling gastric tubes.
methodsA total of 198 patients with indent gastric tubes were selected from 1250 stroke patients to evaluate their oral health using both the BOAS and the OHAT scales. The scores obtained from both scales were then compared to evaluate the feasibility, reliability, and validity of each scale in assessing oral health among stroke patients with indwelling gastric tubes.
resultsThe results showed that both the BOAS and OHAT scales exhibited good reliability and validity in stroke patients with indwelling gastric tubes. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients of BOAS and OHAT in stroke patients with indwelling gastric tubes were 0.89 and 0.91, respectively. In the exploratory factor analysis, one and two common factors were extracted from the two scales, with cumulative variance contributions of 65.89% and 71.85%, respectively. In addition, potential influencing factor correlation analysis found that gender and marital status had a significant correlation with the BOAS score(P < 0.05), the Activities of daily living (ADL) score was found to be significantly correlated with the OHAT score (P < 0.05). Drinking, smoking, income, consciousness, and the result of the water swallow test were all correlated with BOAS and OHAT scores(P < 0.01).
conclusionsThe BOAS and OHAT have demonstrated good reliability and validity and in their ability to assess the oral health of stroke patients with indwelling gastric tubes. Therefore, it is recommended that the selection of oral assessment scales should be further refined in different disease stages of stroke patients to assess the oral health status of patients more accurately and personalized.
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.