Temporal Trends in Clinician-Assessed and Patient-Reported Swallowing Outcomes in Oropharyngeal Cancer Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is a consequence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) treatments and often results in a devastating reduction in quality of life (QoL; Nguyen et al., 2005; Pauloski, 2008). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to report temporal trends in swallowing outcomes using the Modified Barium Swallow Impairment Profile (MBSImP) and the M.D. Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) and to study the relationship between these two measures. METHOD: This was a retrospective review of clinical data collected in January 2013 to December 2017 from a tertiary care center. MBSImP PI scores and MDADI composite scores were collected pretreatment and 1, 6, and 12 months posttreatment. Data were analyzed in aggregate and stratified by treatment modality. To address the primary objective, descriptive statistics were used. To address the secondary objective, four Spearman tests were run between MBSImP PI and MDADI composite scores. RESULTS: A total of 123 OPSCC participants were included. With respect to trends, MBSImP PI scores worsened 1 month posttreatment and remained impaired at 6 and 12 months. For MDADI composite scores, patient reports worsened 1 month posttreatment and subsequently improved at 6 and 12 months. MBSImP PI and MDADI composite scores were weakly negatively correlated (i.e., in agreement) at the pre- and 12-month posttreatment appointments. CONCLUSIONS: Swallowing outcomes in OPSCC patients have distinct yet predictable trends for both clinician-assessed and patient-reported swallowing outcomes during the first year following cancer treatment. However, unlike previous findings, these two types of measures were in agreement at the pretreatment and 12 months posttreatment appointments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".