ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026
Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing in neurogenic oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: Part 2 of a scoping review.
Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe main objective of this scoping review was to describe the qualitative and quantitative parameters of fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) protocols, including their operational definitions and scales used in adults with neurogenic oropharyngeal dysphagia.
methodsSix databases (Wiley Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and LILACS) were extensively searched, following the Joanna Briggs Institute and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, without restriction on study design, publication date, or language. Two blind independent raters selected, reviewed, and extracted all content according to preestablished exclusion criteria. A third rater resolved any divergences between them.
resultsAltogether, 6,033 abstracts were screened, leading to the inclusion of 115 publications. Substantial heterogeneity was observed in the terminology and operational definitions used to describe the qualitative parameters. Additionally, 20 different temporal quantitative parameters were identified, although only half of them were accompanied by operational definitions. Diverse classification methods were also reported, with author-defined measures being more common than validated scales.
conclusionThe parameters derived from FEES in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia are not uniformly defined or analyzed.
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.