Dysphagia related quality of life and its association with cognitive function and sociodemographic \nfactors among older stroke patients in Amman, Jordan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dysphagia is a disorder that compromises the movement of food and liquids \nfrom the mouth to the stomach. It is a frequent disorder in stroke patients, affecting \n50% to 80% of them. Dysphagia and its complications negatively impact the \nemotional, functional, and physical aspects of stroke patients. Moreover, cognitive \nimpairment is one of the most common disabilities after a stroke, affecting 20% to \n80% of stroke survivors. Previous studies have shown that the severity of dysphagia \nincreases with the severity of cognitive dysfunction. However, the correlation between \ncognitive function and the handicapping effect of dysphagia on emotional, functional, \nand physical aspects of quality of life (QOL) in stroke patients is still unknown. Thus, \nthis study aimed to investigate the correlation between cognitive function and the \nhandicapping effect of dysphagia on emotional, functional, and physical aspects of \nQOL in stroke patients. A total of 31 stroke patients with dysphagia participated in this \ncross-sectional study. The Arabic version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment \n(MoCA) was used to assess patients' cognitive function. Furthermore, the Arabic \nversion of the Dysphagia Handicap Index (DHI) was used to assess the emotional, \nfunctional, and physical effects of dysphagia in stroke patients. Most of the patients \n(61.3%) were male, and the majority (67.7%) were between 60-70 years old. The \nfindings showed that 35.5% of the patients had impaired cognitive function, and the \nmean ± SD of the DHI total score was 53.5 ± 9.6. Moreover, the results indicated that \nthere was a statistically significant difference in the means of the physical subscale (p=0.003), emotional subscale (p=0.020), and the DHI total score (p=0.005) between \ngroups with different onsets of dysphagia, indicating that the handicapping effect of \ndysphagia on the physical and emotional aspects, and overall QOL decreases with time \nfollowing a stroke. Additionally, the findings showed a weak negative correlation \nbetween cognitive function (MoCA total score) and the handicapping effect of \ndysphagia on the physical subscale (r = -0.418, p = 0.019) and the DHI total score (r = \n-0.368, p = 0.042). Our findings suggest that dysphagia negatively affects QOL \naspects, and cognitive function may have a role in the severity of the handicapping \neffect of dysphagia on the QOL aspects. Thus, looking into the affected QOL aspects \nsecondary to the debilitating dysphagia and the associated cognitive function will be \nvery helpful for dysphagia management and rehabilitation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".