ArticleCoDAS2026
Reproducibility of tongue pressure measurements using an experimental device.
Article in CoDAS, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the reproducibility of tongue pressure measurements using a low-cost experimental device in adult individuals.
methodsTen adult volunteers of both sexes participated in the study. Tongue pressure was assessed during four distinct movements (elevation, right lateralization, left lateralization, and protrusion), with three repetitions per movement, using an experimental device. Assessments were conducted over a three-week period: the first week was dedicated to familiarization, and the subsequent two weeks to tongue pressure measurements. Reliability was analyzed using the intraclass correlation coefficient, the standard error of measurement, and the minimal detectable difference. Agreement between assessments was verified using Bland-Altman analysis.
resultsThe reliability of tongue pressure measurements was excellent for elevation (0.900), right lateralization (0.960), and protrusion (0.971) movements, and good for left lateralization (0.887), as demonstrated by the intraclass correlation coefficient values. The lowest standard error of measurement and minimal detectable difference were observed for right lateralization, indicating smaller measurement error. Bland-Altman analysis indicated that measurements obtained on different days showed acceptable agreement.
conclusionTongue pressure measurements obtained using the experimental device demonstrated reproducibility (reliability and agreement), supporting its use in clinical practice, particularly in the field of speech-language pathology.
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.