Swallowing Dynamics and Breathing-Swallowing Coordination Are Altered in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Postinspiratory activity, which is essential for laryngeal closure during swallowing to prevent aspiration of food into the airways, is reduced in a mouse model of tauopathy. Therefore, we hypothesized that patients at the stage of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) exhibit alterations in swallowing dynamics and coordination between swallowing and breathing. METHODS: We examined breathing-swallowing coordination in patients with MCI. Patients who scored ≥24 on the Mini-Mental State Examination and <26 on the Japanese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment were recruited at Sumoto Itsuki Hospital. Parameters associated with breathing-swallowing coordination were assessed using a combination of two sensors: a respiratory flow sensor and a piezoelectric sensor attached to the skin surface of the anterior neck. RESULTS: Nineteen patients met the criteria for MCI; 16 of these patients (79.5 ± 9.1 years old) scored <3 on the 10-item Eating Assessment Tool and were enrolled in the study. Their data were compared with those of an age-matched elderly cohort (79.9 ± 2.9 years old). The frequencies of swallowing during inspiration and swallowing immediately followed by inspiration in patients with MCI were 6.9% and 9.6%, respectively; these frequencies were not significantly different from those of the age-matched elderly cohort. However, the timing of swallowing in the respiratory cycle was significantly delayed in the MCI patients, and both time from the onset to the peak of laryngeal elevation and the duration between the onset of rapid laryngeal elevation and the time when the larynx returned to the resting position were significantly lengthened in this group. CONCLUSION: At the stage of MCI, breathing-swallowing coordination has already started to decline.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".