Reference Values for Videofluoroscopic Measures of Swallowing: An Update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is essential that clinicians have evidence-based benchmarks to support accurate diagnosis and clinical decision making. Recent studies report poor reliability for diagnostic judgments and identifying mechanisms of impairment from videofluoroscopy (VFSS). Establishing VFSS reference values for healthy swallowing would help resolve such discrepancies. Steele et al. (2019) released preliminary reference data for quantitative VFSS measures in healthy adults aged < 60 years. Here, we extend that work to provide reference percentiles for VFSS measures across a larger age span. METHOD: Data for 16 VFSS parameters were collected from 78 healthy adults aged 21-82 years (39 male). Participants swallowed three comfortable sips each of thin, slightly, mildly, moderately, and extremely thick barium (20% w/v). VFSS recordings were analyzed in duplicate by trained raters, blind to participant and task, using the Analysis of Swallowing Physiology: Events, Kinematics and Timing (ASPEKT) Method. Reference percentiles (p2.5, 5, 25, 50, 75, 95, and 97.5) were determined as per Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute EP28-A3c guidelines. RESULTS: We present VFSS reference percentile tables, by consistency, for (a) timing parameters (swallow reaction time; the hyoid burst-to-upper esophageal sphincter (UES)-opening interval; UES opening duration; time-to-laryngeal vestibule closure (LVC); and LVC duration) and (b) anatomically scaled pixel-based measures of maximum UES diameter, pharyngeal area at maximum pharyngeal constriction and rest, residue (vallecular, pyriform, other pharyngeal locations, total), and hyoid kinematics (X, Y, XY coordinates of peak position; speed). Clinical decision limits are proposed to demarcate atypical values of potential clinical concern. CONCLUSION: These updated reference percentiles and proposed clinical decision limits are intended to support interpretation and reliability for VFSS assessment data. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24043041.
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 | 0.007 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".