Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to perform a comprehensive bibliometric review of published abstracts presented at the Dysphagia Research Society between 2001 and 2011 in order to delineate research trends, identify knowledge gaps, and recommend areas for future dysphagia research. All 972 research abstracts, both oral and poster presentations, were included. Study designs included cross-sectional (n = 333, 34.4 %), cohort (n = 279, 28.8 %), and case series (n = 210, 21.7 %), while randomized controlled trials constituted only 3.3 % (n = 32) of all research presentations. Levels of evidence were assigned based on analysis of abstract details, as level 1 (n = 29, 3.0 %), level 2 (n = 639, 65.7 %), level 3 (n = 53, 5.5 %), level 4 (n = 243, 25.0 %), and level 5 (n = 8, 0.8 %). Research topics included normal swallowing pathophysiology (n = 279, 28.7 %), swallowing physiology (n = 266, 27.4 %), swallowing diagnosis (n = 192, 19.7 %), swallowing treatment (n = 165, 17.0 %), clinical policy and practice (n = 36, 3.7 %), and basic science (n = 34, 3.5 %). Research occurred in adults (n = 861, 88.6 %), pediatrics (n = 76, 7.8 %), animals (n = 29, 3.0 %), cadavers (n = 3, 0.3 %), and mechanical models (n = 3, 0.3 %). Presenting authors represented 14 different disciplines, with the majority in speech-language pathology, dentistry, basic science, and otolaryngology. Research was performed in 14 different countries with increased geographical diversity during the decade of analysis. Research recommendations derived from our findings call for increased (1) randomized controlled clinical trials consistent with level 1 evidence, (2) focus on pediatric feeding and swallowing, (3) use of animal models to study swallowing dysfunction and novel treatments, and (4) investigations from additional medical specialties. In addition, we applaud current trends and encourage continued support of interdisciplinary, international, and trainee representation.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Narin F, Olivastro D, Stevens KA. Bibliometrics? Theory, practice, and problems. Evaluation Rev. 2009;18:65–76.
Sackett DL, Strauss SE, Richardson WS. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach. Philadelphia, PA: Churchill-Livingstone; 2000.
Streiner DL. The 2 “es” of research efficacy and effectiveness trials. Can J Psychiatry. 2009;47:552–6.
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix 1: Bibliometric Review Sheet
Appendix 2: Definition of Research Topics
-
1.
Diagnostics validation, reliability, sensitivity, specificity, or developmental/pilot investigations of diagnostic techniques, tools, questionnaires, or equipment that test swallowing physiology and function.
-
2.
Treatment swallowing outcomes related to behavioral, surgical, and/or pharmacological treatments specifically aimed at improving swallow physiology and function.
-
3.
Swallow pathophysiology in disease studies examining swallowing pathophysiology and outcomes related to disease, e.g., stroke, Parkinson’s disease, and head and neck cancer.
-
4.
Normal swallow physiology study of normal swallowing physiology in healthy controls and the influence of therapeutic manipulations on the normal/healthy swallow system.
-
5.
Basic science studies performed in animal models investigating physiology, neurophysiology, pathophysiology, and effects of treatment manipulations.
-
6.
Policy and procedures of clinical practice studies examining policy and procedures of dysphagia clinical practice and health care delivery.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Plowman, E.K., Mehdizadeh, O., Leder, S.B. et al. A Bibliometric Review of Published Abstracts Presented at the Dysphagia Research Society: 2001–2011. Dysphagia 28, 123–130 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-012-9420-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-012-9420-2