Determining the Relationship Between Hyoid Bone Kinematics and Airway Protection in Swallowing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Research remains equivocal regarding the links between hyoid movement and penetration-aspiration. The aims of this study were (a) to explore associations between hyoid parameters, laryngeal vestibule closure (LVC) parameters, and penetration-aspiration on thin liquids; and (b) to determine which of these parameters are the strongest predictors of penetration-aspiration. METHOD: This study involved retrospective analysis of an existing videofluoroscopy data set, collected in 305 participants (152 males) with noncongenital/nonsurgical/non-oncological risk for dysphagia. We extracted data for six thin liquid swallows per participant, and obtained measures of hyoid movement (peak position, speed) and LVC (complete/incomplete, timing, duration). Resulting values were coded as typical/atypical relative to healthy reference data. Relationships were explored using chi-square tests and odds ratios (a) for the entire data set and (b) for the subset of data with complete LVC. Hierarchical logistic regression models determined the strongest predictors of penetration-aspiration. RESULTS: Significant associations were found between penetration-aspiration and incomplete LVC, prolonged time-to-most-complete-LVC, short LVC duration, reduced anterior hyoid peak position, and reduced hyoid speed. Hyoid measures were also significantly associated with LVC parameters. In the first regression model, incomplete LVC and prolonged time-to-most-complete-LVC were the only significant predictors of penetration-aspiration. For cases with complete LVC, the only significant predictor was prolonged time-to-most-complete-LVC. CONCLUSIONS: Although reduced anterior hyoid peak position and speed are associated with penetration-aspiration on thin liquids, these measures do not independently account for penetration-aspiration when considered in conjunction with measures of LVC. When identifying mechanisms explaining penetration-aspiration, clinicians should focus on LVC (complete/incomplete) and timeliness of LVC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".