Sapienza Global Bedside Evaluation of Swallowing after Stroke: the<scp>GLOBE</scp>‐3S study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Dysphagia occurs in up to 50% of all patients with acute stroke. There is debate regarding which is the most effective screening tool in identifying aspiration in patients with acute stroke. We assessed the accuracy of the Sapienza Global Bedside Evaluation of Swallowing after Stroke (GLOBE-3S), which combines the Toronto Bedside Swallowing Screening Test (TOR-BSST©) with oxygen desaturation and laryngeal elevation measurement during swallowing. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with stroke within 72 h of symptom onset. All patients with stroke firstly underwent a standard neurological examination, then the GLOBE-3S evaluation and finally the fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). Two different assessors, a neurologist and a speech pathologist, blind to both the clinical data and each other's evaluation, administered the GLOBE-3S and FEES examination. We assessed the accuracy of the GLOBE-3S in detecting post-stroke swallow impairment with aspiration using the FEES as the standard. RESULTS: We enrolled 50 patients with acute stroke, 28 of whom (56%) had swallowing impairment with aspiration at FEES evaluation. A total of 33 patients (66%) failed the GLOBE-3S evaluation. The GLOBE-3S reached a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 77.3% (negative predictive value, 100%; positive likelihood ratio, 4.34). The median time required for the GLOBE-3S to be performed was 297 s. CONCLUSIONS: GLOBE-3S is quick to perform at the bedside and can accurately identify aspiration in patients with acute stroke. By including the measurement of laryngeal elevation and monitoring of oxygen desaturation, it could represent a highly sensitive instrument to avoid the misdiagnosis of silent aspirators.
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 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 | 0.008 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".