MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903951758 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022775

Cost of oropharyngeal dysphagia after stroke: protocol for a systematic review

2018· review· en· W2903951758 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sergio Marín, Mateu Serra‐Prat, Omar Ortega, Père Clavé

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDysphagia Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaYork University
KeywordsMedicineDysphagiaStroke (engine)MalnutritionPneumoniaIntensive care medicineAspiration pneumoniaMEDLINEHealth careOropharyngeal dysphagiaRehabilitationEmergency medicinePhysical therapySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) is a major disorder following stroke. OD can produce alterations in both the efficacy and safety of deglutition and may result in malnutrition, dehydration, frailty, respiratory infections and pneumonia. These complications can be avoided by early detection and treatment of OD in poststroke patients, and hospital stays, medication and mortality rates can be reduced. In addition to acute in-hospital costs from OD complications, there are other costs related to poststroke OD such as direct non-healthcare costs or indirect costs. The objective of this systematic review is to assess and summarise literature on the costs related to OD in poststroke patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review of studies on the cost of OD and its complications (aspiration, malnutrition, dehydration, aspiration pneumonia and death) in patients who had a stroke will be performed from the perspectives of the hospital, the healthcare system and/or the society. The main outcomes of interest are the costs related to poststroke OD. We will search MEDLINE, Embase and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database. Studies will be included if they are partial economic evaluation studies, studies that provide information on costs in adult (>17 years) poststroke patients with OD and/or its complications (malnutrition, dehydration, frailty, respiratory infections and pneumonia) or economic evaluation studies in which the cost of this condition has been estimated. Studies will be excluded if they refer to oesophageal dysphagia or OD caused by causes other than stroke. Main study information will be presented and summarised in tables, separately for studies that provide incremental costs attributable to OD or its complications and studies that report the effect of OD or its complications on total costs of stroke, and according to the perspective from which costs were measured. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018099977.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.023
Bibliometrics0.0160.015
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.360
GPT teacher head0.629
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicDysphagia Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207