SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Underserved groups in dysphagia intervention trials in Parkinson's disease: A scoping review.

Ageing Res Rev · 2023-12-02

DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2023.102150PMID: 38043779

Check source for accessScoping Review; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundUnderserved groups in Parkinson's disease (PD) intervention studies are well recognised. However, it remains unclear whether these exclusions apply to oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) intervention studies in PD. The aim of this scoping review was to identify characteristics of included participants and underserved groups in intervention studies in OD in PD.MethodsSix electronic databases and one trial registry were searched without language restrictions. Screening of studies and data extraction were independently conducted by four reviewers.ResultsOf the 26 studies included, none fully reported the participants' ethnicity. Where data was available, 70% of participants were male with a mean age of 68 years, mean PD duration of 7.26 years, median Hoehn and Yahr stage of 2.5, mild OD and mostly recruited from movement disorders clinics. Underserved groups were younger people (ConclusionsCareful consideration of all characteristics of individuals with OD in PD is essential for improving the external validity of studies. This will enhance the generalisability of research findings to the broader PD population, ultimately strengthening the evidence base for OD interventions in PD.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.