SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2026
A meta-analysis of the efficacy of balloon dilation intervention for patients with cricopharyngeal achalasia after stroke.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of balloon dilatation for the treatment of swallowing disorders after stroke. Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, and the Chinese Wanfang database were searched from their inception to 30 October 2024. Two authors independently screened all studies, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies. Review Manager 5.4 and Stata software (version 16) were used to assess study quality. Results: A total of 25 studies involving 1,134 patients were included in the present analysis. The results suggest that balloon dilatation significantly improves the effective rate (OR = 6.11; 95% CI: 4.16, 8.98), videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS) score (MD = 2.23, 95% CI: 1.98, 2.48), and Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) score (MD = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.40, 2.47); it also shortens swallowing passage time (MD = -0.07; 95% CI: -0.08, -0.06), improves the Kubota Drinking Water Test (KDWT) score (MD = -1.01, 95% CI: -1.55, -0.47), and reduces the incidence of aspiration pneumonia (OR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.21, 0.98). Conclusion: Compared to routine rehabilitation training, balloon dilation is a safer and more effective method for improving swallowing 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.