Route of Feeding as a Proxy for Dysphagia After Stroke and the Effect of Transdermal Glyceryl Trinitrate: Data from the Efficacy of Nitric Oxide in Stroke Randomised Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-stroke dysphagia is common, associated with poor outcome and often requires non-oral feeding/fluids. The relationship between route of feeding and outcome, as well as treatment with glyceryl trinitrate (GTN), was studied prospectively. The Efficacy of Nitric Oxide in Stroke (ENOS) trial assessed transdermal GTN (5 mg versus none for 7 days) in 4011 patients with acute stroke and high blood pressure. Feeding route (oral = normal or soft diet; non-oral = nasogastric tube, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube, parenteral fluids, no fluids) was assessed at baseline and day 7. The primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) measured at day 90. At baseline, 1331 (33.2%) patients had non-oral feeding, were older, had more severe stroke and more were female, than 2680 (66.8%) patients with oral feeding. By day 7, 756 patients had improved from non-oral to oral feeding, and 119 had deteriorated. Non-oral feeding at baseline was associated with more impairment at day 7 (Scandinavian Stroke Scale 29.0 versus 43.7; 2p < 0.001), and worse mRS (4.0 versus 2.7; 2p < 0.001) and death (23.6 versus 6.8%; 2p = 0.014) at day 90. Although GTN did not modify route of feeding overall, randomisation ≤6 h of stroke was associated with a move to more oral feeding at day 7 (odds ratio = 0.61, 95% confidence intervals 0.38, 0.98; 2p = 0.040). As a proxy for dysphagia, non-oral feeding is present in 33% of patients with acute stroke and associated with more impairment, dependency and death. GTN moved feeding route towards oral intake if given very early after stroke. Clinical Trial Registration Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN99414122.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".