↓ Skip to main content

A statistical analysis of cervical auscultation signals from adults with unsafe airway protection

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A statistical analysis of cervical auscultation signals from adults with unsafe airway protection
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12984-015-0110-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joshua M. Dudik, Atsuko Kurosu, James L. Coyle, Ervin Sejdić

Abstract

Aspiration, where food or liquid is allowed to enter the larynx during a swallow, is recognized as the most clinically salient feature of oropharyngeal dysphagia. This event can lead to short-term harm via airway obstruction or more long-term effects such as pneumonia. In order to non-invasively identify this event using high resolution cervical auscultation there is a need to characterize cervical auscultation signals from subjects with dysphagia who aspirate. In this study, we collected swallowing sound and vibration data from 76 adults (50 men, 26 women, mean age 62) who underwent a routine videofluoroscopy swallowing examination. The analysis was limited to swallows of liquid with either thin (<5 cps) or viscous (≈300 cps) consistency and was divided into those with deep laryngeal penetration or aspiration (unsafe airway protection), and those with either shallow or no laryngeal penetration (safe airway protection), using a standardized scale. After calculating a selection of time, frequency, and time-frequency features for each swallow, the safe and unsafe categories were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum statistical tests. Our analysis found that few of our chosen features varied in magnitude between safe and unsafe swallows with thin swallows demonstrating no statistical variation. We also supported our past findings with regard to the effects of sex and the presence or absence of stroke on cervical ausculation signals, but noticed certain discrepancies with regards to bolus viscosity. Overall, our results support the necessity of using multiple statistical features concurrently to identify laryngeal penetration of swallowed boluses in future work with high resolution cervical auscultation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Other 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 16 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 16%
Engineering 4 8%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 17 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 02 February 2016.
All research outputs
#6,244,921
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#368
of 1,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,826
of 395,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#6
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 395,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.