The influence of physical exercise on head and neck structures involved in swallowing and its functions: A scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this review is to describe how different types of physical exercise may influence structures and functions involved in swallowing, in both mature animal models and adult humans. The proposed scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Quantitative studies (experimental and quasi-experimental study designs including randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, before and after studies, and interrupted time-series studies) that examined either mature animal models or adults who engaged in physical exercise programs will be included in the review. An initial limited search of MEDLINE was undertaken to identify articles on the topic. A health sciences librarian used the text words contained in the titles and abstracts of relevant articles, and the index terms used to describe the articles to develop a full search strategy for MEDLINE (Ovid). The search strategy was peer-reviewed by a second health sciences librarian using Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS). The databases to be searched include MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Scopus (Elsevier). Sources of unpublished studies and gray literature to be searched include WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ProQuest Dissertation and Thesis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.097 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.013 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".