Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 384

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Swallowing Disorders following Acute Stroke: Prevalence and Diagnostic Accuracy

Mann, Giselle, Hankey, Graeme J., Cameron, David·2000·Cerebrovascular Diseases

Abstract

We prospectively examined 128 patients with acute first-ever stroke to determine the prevalence of swallowing disorders, the diagnostic accuracy of our clinical assessment of swallowing function compared with videofluoroscopy, and interobserver agreement for the clinical and videofluoroscopic diagnosis of swallowing disorders and aspiration. We found clinical and videofluoroscopic evidence of a swallowing disorder in 51% [95% confidence interval (CI) 42–60%] and 64% (95% CI 55–72%) of patients, respectively, and aspiration in 49% (95% CI 40–58%) and 22% (95% CI 15–29%) of patients, respectively. The optimal clinical criteria for detecting videofluoroscopic evidence of a swallowing disorder and aspiration were any clinical evidence of a swallowing disorder (sensitivity 73%, 95% CI 62–82%; specificity 89%, 95% CI 76–96%), and any clinical evidence of aspiration (sensitivity 93%, 95% CI 76–99%; specificity 63%, 95% CI 53–72%). The interobserver agreement between two speech pathologists for the clinical diagnosis of a swallowing disorder (κ: 0.82 ± 0.09) and aspiration (κ: 0.75 ± 0.09) was good, and between a speech pathologist and radiologist for the videofluoroscopic diagnosis of a swallowing disorder (κ: 0.75 ± 0.09) and aspiration (κ: 0.41 ± 0.09), it was good and fair, respectively. Although clinical bedside examination underestimates the frequency of swallowing abnormalities and overestimates the frequency of aspiration compared with videofluoroscopy, it may still offer valuable information for the diagnosis of swallowing impairment. Long-term follow-up studies are required to determine the independent functional significance of the findings of the bedside and videofluoroscopic examinations in predicting the occurrence of important outcome events such as aspiration pneumonia.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000016094

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 384

Metadata

Authors
Mann, G., Hankey, G. J., & Cameron, D.
Venue
Cerebrovascular Diseases
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2000
Volume
10
Issue
5
Pages
380-386
ISSN
  • 1015-9770 (ISSN-L)
  • 1421-9786
OpenAlex
W2029523860
Cited by
384
References
3
FWCI
15.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Swallowing Disorders following Acute Stroke: Prevalence and Diagnostic Accuracy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000016094
The paper
Mann, G., Hankey, G. J., & Cameron, D. (2000). Swallowing Disorders following Acute Stroke: Prevalence and Diagnostic Accuracy. Cerebrovascular Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1159/000016094

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.