Swallowing Evaluation in Patients With Unilateral Vocal Fold Immobility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unilateral vocal fold immobility is the neurological disorder most frequently seen in the larynx that may cause swallowing dysfunction. The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the oral and pharyngeal phases of swallowing in patients with unilateral vocal fold immobility. METHODS: It was evaluated by videofluoroscopy of the swallowing of 14 patients with unilateral vocal fold immobility and 11 control subjects. The examination was performed with swallows of 5 mL and 10 mL of liquid and paste boluses. The oral transit, pharyngeal transit and clearance, the duration of upper esophageal sphincter (UES) transit, the duration of the hyoid movement, and the timing of the events were measured. RESULTS: With swallows of 10 mL of liquid bolus (controls: 0.23 ± 0.04s, patients: 0.27 ± 0.05s, p = 0.03) and 5 mL of paste bolus (controls: 0.18 ± 0.04s, patients: 0.22 ± 0.04s, p = 0.01) there was a longer duration of UES transit in patients compared with controls. The UES opened earlier in the control subjects with the increase in bolus volume from 5 mL to 10 mL (p < 0.05), an effect that was not seen in patients with vocal fold immobility. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that patients with unilateral vocal fold immobility may have alteration of bolus transit through the UES and have no adaptation in the swallowing timing related to the increase in bolus volume.
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 | 0.001 | 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".