The Adverse Effects and Events of Thickened Liquid Use in Adults: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Practice pattern studies suggest that liquid modification is currently a primary strategy used by speech-language pathologists to manage dysphagia; however, the breadth of negative consequences associated with their use is not well understood. The purpose of this review was to summarize the evidence on adverse events and effects of thickened liquid (TL) use in adults. Method: Six databases were searched in February 2022: EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), Speechbite, AMED, AgeLine, and CINAHL. Articles were included if they compared adults receiving different TL viscosities and discussed at least one adverse event or effect of consuming TLs. Articles were excluded if they were review articles, rehabilitation studies, rheological analyses, not in English, or not peer reviewed. Screening and data extraction were completed by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane tools. Results: Thirty-three studies ( N = 4,990 participants across all studies) were eligible for inclusion (2,405 unique records screened). Reported adverse events included dehydration ( n = 5), pneumonia ( n = 4), death ( n = 2), urinary tract infection ( n = 1), and hospitalization ( n = 1); adverse effects included reduced quality of life ( n = 18), aspiration ( n = 12), reduced intake ( n = 8), increased residue ( n = 4), and reduced medication bioavailability ( n = 2). Results were mapped on to codes and domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Conclusions: A range of adverse outcomes associated with TL use were identified. Adverse outcomes should be monitored and reported in dysphagia research. Given current research evidence, it is vital for clinicians to weigh the risks and benefits of TL use to mitigate potential adverse outcomes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".