ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Intermittent oroesophageal vs. nasogastric tube feeding in frail elderly with dysphagia: a retrospective comparative study.
Article in Frontiers in 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dysphagia affects 15%-20% of community elderly, 50%-75 % of nursing-home and >80 % of hospitalized patients; 60 % cases stem from neurologic disease. We compared intermittent oro-esophageal (IOE) vs. nasogastric tube (NGT) feeding in 120 frail dysphagic elders (Jun-Dec 2024). Methods: The sample size was calculated based on the expected prevalence of aspiration pneumonia (25 vs. 8%), with 60 participants enrolled per group. Frail elderly patients with dysphagia were randomly allocated to the intermittent oro-esophageal or nasogastric tube group using a random number table. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 26.0, including Results: Baseline comparable. Both groups improved albumin and swallowing equally, yet IOE cut aspiration pneumonia from 23.3 % (NGT) to 8.3 %, enhanced oral intake and MNA-SF without added mucosal injury. Frailty, age, stroke history and NGT predicted complications; Kubota grade-3 patients gained most from IOE. Conclusion: IOE is safer and more effective than NGT for frail elderly dysphagia, reducing pneumonia and restoring oral feeding.
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.