ReviewMovement disorders clinical practice2026
Breathe, Eat, Talk: Three Essential Ingredients to Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Movement Disorders.
Review in Movement disorders clinical practice, 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreathing, eating, and talking (BET) impairments are common yet frequently underrecognized features of movement disorders. Deficits in respiration, swallowing, voice, and speech may emerge early in the course of a disease, adversely affecting safety, participation, and quality of life. Routine neurological examinations may not adequately capture their impact.
objectiveTo characterize the clinical importance of BET dysfunction across several movement disorders by comparing neurological and speech-language pathology (SLP) approaches to assessment and recommendations for improved early identification, referral and multidisciplinary management.
methodsCase examples were used to illustrate and compare clinical findings obtained through standard neurological evaluation versus comprehensive SLP assessment. A targeted literature review and comparison of commonly used neurology and SLP clinical tools were also conducted to examine current approaches to BET evaluation and referral.
resultsCase examples illustrated how routine neurological examinations underestimated the severity and functional impact of BET impairments. This was contrasted with SLP identification of clinically meaningful deficits in respiratory function, cough, swallowing safety, communication effectiveness, and quality of life not captured by standard disease rating scales. Review of the literature demonstrated that commonly used neurological rating scales provide limited evaluation of BET dysfunction, whereas multidisciplinary assessment incorporating caregiver input, patient-reported outcomes, perceptual evaluation, and instrumental testing improves detection and treatment planning.
conclusionBET dysfunction is prevalent across movement disorders and substantially influences quality of life. Early referral to SLPs and integration of multidisciplinary BET assessment can improve diagnostic precision, facilitate timely intervention, reduce preventable complications, and support person-centered care throughout disease progression.
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.