Observational studyMedicine2026
Development and validation of the nomogram of aspiration pneumonia in stroke patients with dysphagia: A retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although poststroke dysphagia has been shown to be associated with aspiration pneumonia (AP), the prevalence and influencing factors of AP in stroke patients with dysphagia are still not entirely clear. This study aims to explore the prevalence and influencing factors of AP in stroke patients with dysphagia and to establish a nomogram model. This retrospective study included stroke patients with dysphagia from 2020 to 2024. Information was collected on basic data, nutritional status, swallowing function, blood routine tests, Barthel index and AP. Univariate and the multivariate analyses were used to identify the influencing factors of AP. A nomogram model was developed, and internal validation was conducted using k-fold cross-validation while external validation was conducted using the data from an additional database. Totally, 761 participants were included, with an AP prevalence of 31.41%. After adjusting for potential confounders, age ([56-65]: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.756 [1.132, 2.724]; [66-75]: aOR [95% CI]: 2.313 [1.300, 4.116]; >75: aOR [95% CI]: 2.928 [1.552, 5.525]), denture status (wearing: aOR [95% CI]: 1.429 [1.115, 2.096]), paralysis (hemiplegia: aOR [95% CI]: 1.676 [1.104, 2.544]; quadriplegia: aOR [95% CI]: 1.829 [1.184, 2.826]), nutrition support mode (intermittent oro-esophageal tube feeding: aOR [95% CI]: 0.552 [0.377, 0.807]), stroke location (brainstem: aOR [95% CI]: 1.634 [1.173, 2.276]), history of reflux esophagitis (yes: aOR [95% CI]:1.979 [1.372, 2.855]), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (≤5: aOR [95% CI]: 1.921 [1.226, 3.009]; [6-20]: aOR [95% CI]: 3.154 [1.902, 5.230]; >20: aOR [95% CI]: 0.856 [0.781, 0.939]), mini-mental state examination (aOR [95% CI]: 0.856 [0.781, 0.939]), malnutrition (yes: aOR [95% CI]: 1.424 [1.099, 2.399]), penetration-aspiration scale (aOR [95% CI]: 1.479 [1.344, 7.987]), neutrophil percentage (>70%: aOR [95% CI]: 1.929 [1.186, 3.3136]), white blood cell count (abnormal: aOR [95% CI]: 2.019 [1.247, 3.270]), and Barthel index (aOR [95% CI]: 0.948 [0.910, 0.988]) were the independent factors associated with AP in stroke patients with dysphagia. K-fold cross-validation revealed a mean area under curve of 0.729. The C-index for the training set and validation set were 0.778 and 0.748, respectively, and the model exhibited good stability and accuracy. The decision curve analysis revealed a net benefit when the risk threshold was between 0 and 0.85. The nomogram can help identify the risk of AP in stroke patients with dysphagia.
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.