ArticleDysphagia2026
The Impact of Videofluoroscopic Pulse Rate on Measures of Swallow Safety in Infants and Adults with Feeding and Swallowing Disorders.
Article in Dysphagia, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This investigation assessed the impact of videofluoroscopic resolution on measures of swallow safety. Thirty adult and twenty infant swallow studies, all acquired at 30 frames and 30 pulses per second (fps, pps), were obtained from a publicly available repository of swallow studies. All swallow studies were altered to simulate 15 and 5 pulses per second. Safety was assessed using the penetration-aspiration score and a modified DIGEST safety score. Analysis of outcome measures was performed and compared across the three temporal resolutions (30, 15, and 5 pps). Significant differences in measures of safety occurred when lower pulse rates were employed. All 20 infant participants were classified as having safe swallows at 5 pps, despite 11 demonstrating unsafe swallows (PAS > 2) at 30 pps. This pattern was also observed in adult participants to a lesser extent. Reducing pulse rates below 30 pps significantly compromises the accuracy of swallow safety assessment for all age groups. The systematic underestimation of safety violations has direct implications for clinical decision-making and patient risk assessment. These findings support maintaining 30 fps/pps as the standard for videofluoroscopic swallow studies (VFSS) when swallow safety evaluation is paramount and suggest that alternative radiation reduction strategies should be prioritized over pulse rate reduction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41661308What 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.