Altered pharyngeal structure and dynamics among patients with cervical kyphosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Deformities of the anterior cervical spine are an established cause of dysphagia. Whereas osteophytes and spinal fusion hardware have been reported to alter bolus flow and contribute to swallowing dysfunction, the relationship between abnormal spine curvature and swallowing dysfunction is not established. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the association between cervical kyphosis and objective measures of swallowing dysfunction on videofluoroscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study of patients presenting to tertiary dysphagia center. METHODS: All videofluoroscopic swallow studies (VFSS) performed at our institution, between August 1, 2014, and August 1, 2015, were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with abnormal cervical kyphosis, according to Cobb and Jackson angle measurements. Patients with kyphosis were age- and gender-matched to persons without kyphosis. VFSS and demographic parameters were collected and compared between groups. RESULTS: ; P = .0007). This was associated with increased hypopharyngeal transit time (0.57 seconds, 95% CI: 0.045-1.09 seconds, P = .034), and higher prevalence of penetration (P = .014). There was no significant difference in the pharyngeal constriction ratio (PCR), a surrogate measure of pharyngeal strength (P = .83). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cervical spine kyphosis have a significantly dilated pharynx (P = .0007), elongated hypopharyngeal transit time (P = .034), and worsened penetration aspiration scores (P = .021). Absence of a difference in PCR suggests adequate compensation as a group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b. Laryngoscope, 127:1832-1837, 2017.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".