ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Human-AI collaboration for dysphagia rehabilitation from effectiveness to implementation complexity: a systematic review.
Article in NPJ digital 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
Oropharyngeal dysphagia affects over half of neurological and oncological populations, yet rehabilitation is constrained by a global therapist shortage that human-AI collaboration has not demonstrably addressed. Here we report a systematic review of 31 studies (1012 participants; PROSPERO: CRD420251115997) evaluating AI-augmented swallowing rehabilitation in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia, or in healthy volunteers testing systems designed for clinical application. We synthesised findings by aetiology and collaboration mode, assessing risk of bias and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation, GRADE). AI-augmented interventions produce short-term gains in functional oral intake and physiological measures (GRADE moderate/low certainty), but these effects attenuate within weeks of cessation, and adherence declines sharply once clinician supervision is withdrawn. NASSS framework analysis reveals a central paradox: the adopter domain-digital literacy, cognitive impairment, interface usability-is the dominant implementation barrier (61.3% rated high), meaning the populations with the greatest need face the steepest barriers to adoption. AI algorithm performance is rated at very low certainty, with validation largely confined to healthy volunteers. These findings support advancement to pragmatic trials for supervised post-stroke rehabilitation but underscore that evidence for other aetiologies, unsupervised settings, and sustained outcomes remains insufficient.
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.