MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6945699433 · doi:10.23641/asha.17701022

Prevalence of poststroke dysphagia in India (Krishnamurthy et al., 2022)

2022· article· en· W6945699433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDysphagia Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDysphagiaStroke (engine)PneumoniaIncidence (geometry)Confidence intervalEpidemiologyAspiration pneumoniaRelative risk

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of reported dysphagia and associated pneumonia risk among patients with stroke in India. Method: We carried out a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The primary outcome of interest was dysphagia and pneumonia among patients with stroke in India. Two review authors independently assessed the quality of studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and extracted related data. Meta-analysis was performed for frequency of dysphagia, associated pneumonia, and its relative risk using a random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was computed using the I2 index.Results: A total of 3,644 titles were screened, and only eight studies met our inclusion criteria. Based on data from these studies, we calculated the pooled prevalence of dysphagia (47.71%; 95% confidence interval [CI] [20.49%, 70.92%], p < .001) and pneumonia (20.43%; 95% CI [10.73%, 30.14%], p < .001) for patients with stroke in India. We found that the relative risks of pneumonia in patients with stroke and dysphagia versus those patients with stroke and no dysphagia was 9.41 (95% CI [5.60, 15.80], p < .001). Data on length of hospital stay and rates of mortality secondary to pneumonia are also presented.Conclusions: Despite the high incidence of dysphagia and associated pneumonia, the methodological quality of studies is fair and there is little research focused on epidemiological data. We call to arms to those SLPs working with patients with stroke in India to become proactive in both clinical practice and research domains. Supplemental Material S1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) chart. Krishnamurthy, R., Balasubramanium, R. K., & Premkumar, P. K. (2022). Systematic review and meta-analysis of dysphagia and associated pneumonia in patients with stroke from India: A call to arms. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_AJSLP-21-00175

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.013
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.383 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicDysphagia Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207