↓ Skip to main content

Interrater Reliability of Videofluoroscopic Swallow Evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in Dysphagia, February 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
172 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
Title
Interrater Reliability of Videofluoroscopic Swallow Evaluation
Published in
Dysphagia, February 2003
DOI 10.1007/s00455-002-0085-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sandro J. Stoeckli, Thierry A. G. M. Huisman, Burkhardt A. G. M. Seifert, Bonnie J. W. Martin–Harris

Abstract

The past two decades have brought an enormous widening of interest in and knowledge about swallowing disorders. The most frequently used technique for swallow evaluation is X-ray videofluoroscopy. Most interventions are based on this examination. Only a few studies assessing interobserver reliability of videofluoroscopy have been published. The aim of our study was to assess the interobserver reliability of videofluoroscopy for swallow evaluation. Fifty-one consecutive dysphagic patients referred for videofluoroscopy were entered into the study regardless of their underlying disorder. The first swallow (5 ml of a semisolid radio-opague contrast media) of each patient was assessed in the lateral projection by 9 independent, experienced observers from different international swallow centers. All studies were evaluated according to a standardized protocol sheet and the interobserver reliability was calculated. The interobserver reliabilities assessed as kappa coefficient for parameters of the oral and pharyngeal phase, for the temporal occurrence of penetration/aspiration, and for the location of bolus residue ranged from 0.01 to 0.56. High reliability with an intraclass coefficient of 0.80 was achieved only with the well defined penetration/aspiration score. Our study underlines the need for exact definitions of the parameters assessed by videofluoroscopy, in order to raise interobserver reliability. To date, only aspiration is evaluated with high reliability by videofluoroscopy, whereas the reliability of all other parameters of oropharyngeal swallow is poor.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 1%
Unknown 92 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Researcher 7 8%
Other 26 28%
Unknown 15 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 19%
Linguistics 4 4%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 20 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 March 2015.
All research outputs
#4,001,414
of 23,839,820 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia
#288
of 1,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,277
of 129,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,839,820 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,327 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 129,843 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them