ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Sensor Technologies for Measuring Tongue Biomechanics Relevant to Swallowing: A Narrative Review.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tongue biomechanics are central to swallowing, yet commonly used clinical assessments provide limited insight into the forces and coordination underlying bolus propulsion. Sensor technologies have emerged to address this gap, but the literature remains fragmented across device classes, calibration approaches, and outcome definitions. This narrative review synthesizes sensor modalities used to characterize tongue biomechanics in dysphagia assessment and rehabilitation. A structured search of biomedical databases identified studies describing pneumatic, piezoelectric, strain gauge, capacitive, optical, and position-tracking systems. Across modalities, consistent physiological patterns are observed, including anterior-to-posterior pressure sequencing and task-dependent modulation with bolus properties. However, cross-study comparison is constrained by variability in sensor configuration, placement, and calibration, limiting the development of shared normative thresholds. To address this, we introduce a comparative maturity framework that situates modalities along a continuum from clinically established to proof-of-concept systems. Pneumatic and piezoelectric devices demonstrate the strongest evidence base and clinical integration, whereas capacitive and optical systems remain early-stage with minimal validation in patient populations. Position-tracking approaches provide complementary kinematic information but remain constrained by cost and ecological validity. Progress will require standardized calibration frameworks, harmonized protocols, and multimodal integration to support clinically interpretable metrics of tongue function.
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.