ArticleDysphagia2026
Evaluating a Regression-Based Approach to Norming the Test of Masticating and Swallowing Solids (ToMaSS): A Comparison with Traditional Stratified Methods.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Test of Masticating and Swallowing Solids (ToMaSS) is a commonly-used adjunctive assessment to quantify solid bolus ingestion. However, published norms are characterised by relatively small sample sizes and wide age brackets, increasing the risk of skew, influence by outliers, and reduced statistical power. Regression-based approaches to norming may mitigate some of these limitations. To evaluate whether a regression-based approach offered a significant advantage over the traditional stratified approach for the refinement of ToMaSS norms. Prospective-retrospective design, with prospectively collected data combined with historical data from published and unpublished laboratory datasets. All data consisted of healthy adults (aged 20 to 80 + years) recruited from the general public. McFadden's Pseudo R² and Root Mean Squared Error (MSE) were calculated and compared for both statistical approaches. Regression-based norms (GAM Gamma and COM-Poisson models) showed a modest improvement in model fit over traditional stratified norms, with McFadden's Pseudo R² increasing by 6% to 43% across outcomes. MSE values followed a similar trend, with regression-based norms reducing prediction error by up to 12%. Findings support that a regression-based approach offered a significant advantage over a traditional stratified approach to constructing ToMaSS norms. Advantages included smaller sample size requirements and individualised estimates across continuous age ranges. This flexibility allows for a more nuanced understanding of individual ToMaSS performance, which may be of particular relevance to clinical populations where changes in the oral phase of swallowing may vary greatly within a short time frame.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42101627What 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.