Use of Neuromuscular Electrostimulation in the Treatment of Dysphagia in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We explored the possible effects of neuromuscular electrostimulation on the swallowing function of patients with multiple sclerosis and swallowing problems. METHODS: Twenty-five patients (average age, 53.1 years; SD, 9.8 years) with multiple sclerosis and swallowing problems were treated for 3 weeks with 2 sessions per week of neuromuscular electrostimulation. The average time since the onset of multiple sclerosis was 16.5 years (SD, 10.2 years). Seventeen patients were examined with transnasal flexible endoscopy 1 week before treatment and 1 week after treatment. RESULTS: After treatment, a significant decrease in pooling of saliva in the pyriform sinuses was seen in 6 patients (p = 0.03), and significantly less aspiration during swallowing of thin liquids (p <0.01) was seen in 9 patients. Overall, the 25 patients reported that their swallowing had improved (p <0.01), and in 20% of the patients,it had become less strenuous. No adverse effects of the treatment were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that the treatment of swallowing problems with neuromuscular electrostimulation in patients with multiple sclerosis in this sample was successful in the reduction of pooling of saliva and in the reduction of aspiration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".