ReviewFrontiers in neurology
Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound for dysphagia in neurological disorders including stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dysphagia in patients with severe stroke: influencing factors and coping strategies.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
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
Objective: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography in detecting dysphagia and to compare it with other diagnostic methods. Methods: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. The literature was searched in multiple databases, including the Cochrane Central Controlled Trials Registry (a global database of controlled trials); MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science (biomedical, pharmacological, and multidisciplinary citation databases, respectively); CINAHL (focusing on nursing and allied health research); and Chinese databases including Wanfang Data, CNKI, and VIP (covering academic, scholarly, and scientific-technical literature). Only articles published in the English and Chinese languages were included. Studies were eligible if they compared the accuracy of ultrasound testing with that of other diagnostic methods in dysphagia patients. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) criteria (a tool for evaluating bias risk in diagnostic accuracy studies) were used to assess the risk of bias following standard procedures. Results: We included eight studies involving a total of 538 patients with dysphagia: seven trials for post-stroke dysphagia and one trial for dysphagia in children with cerebral palsy. The combined results showed that the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound were 0.81 (95% CI 0.73-0.87) and 0.86 (95% CI 0.76-0.93), suggesting that the diagnostic performance of ultrasound is reliable for detecting dysphagia in patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.