Improvements in tongue strength and pressure-generation precision following a tongue-pressure training protocol in older individuals with dysphagia: Three case reports
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dysphagia, or difficulty swallowing, often occurs secondary to conditions such as stroke, head injury or progressive disease, many of which increase in frequency with advancing age. Sarcopenia, the gradual loss of muscle bulk and strength, can place older individuals at greater risk for dysphagia. Data are reported for three older participants in a pilot trial of a tongue-pressure training therapy. During the experimental therapy protocol, participants performed isometric strength exercises for the tongue as well as tongue pressure accuracy tasks. Biofeedback was provided using the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI), an instrument that measures tongue pressure. Treatment outcome measures show increased isometric tongue strength, improved tongue pressure generation accuracy, improved bolus control on videofluoroscopy, and improved functional dietary intake by mouth. These preliminary results indicate that, for these three adults with dysphagia, tongue-pressure training was beneficial for improving both instrumental and functional aspects of swallowing. The experimental treatment protocol holds promise as a rehabilitative tool for various dysphagia populations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it