EQUATOR Network Mapping Review for Dysphagia Research

• Published in: American journal of speech-language pathology Vol. 33; no. 5; pp. 2207 - 2219
• Main Authors: Steele, Catriona M., Burdick, Ryan J., Dallal-York, Justine, Shapira-Galitz, Yael, Abrams, Sophia Werden
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 18.09.2024
• Subjects: Biomedical Research - standards; Deglutition - physiology; Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis; Deglutition Disorders - physiopathology; Deglutition Disorders - therapy; Guidelines as Topic; Humans; Research Design - standards
• ISSN: 1058-0360; 1558-9110; 1558-9110
• DOI: 10.1044/2023_AJSLP-23-00306

The EQUATOR Network is an international initiative aimed at improving published health research through use of reporting guidelines. We conducted a review to determine the extent to which EQUATOR Network guidelines contain recommendations relevant for dysphagia research in human subjects. We downloaded all 542 EQUATOR Network guidelines on November 8, 2022. Each guideline was reviewed by two independent raters and judged for relevance to dysphagia and related fields (e.g., otolaryngology, gastroenterology). Dysphagia-relevant guidelines pertaining to quantitative human subjects research were further inspected to identify reporting guidance regarding (a) general research elements (e.g., data collection, statistical methods), (b) participant characteristics (e.g., demographics, accrual, randomization), (c) screening and clinical/noninstrumental assessments, (d) videofluoroscopic examinations, (e) flexible endoscopic examinations, (f) other instrumentation in swallowing research, (g) dysphagia treatment, (h) patient-/care provider-reported outcome measures, and (i) any other narrowly specified focus relevant for research on swallowing. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Of 542 guidelines, 156 addressed quantitative research in human subjects relevant to dysphagia. Of these, 104 addressed general research elements and 108 addressed participant characteristics. Only 14 guidelines partially addressed the other topics of interest, and none addressed elements relevant to reporting videofluoroscopic or endoscopic assessments of swallowing. We were unable to find guidelines with specific relevance to reporting key methods in dysphagia research. This lack of guidance illustrates a gap that hinders the critical appraisal of research quality in the field of dysphagia. Our review highlights the need to develop dysphagia-specific tools for critical appraisal and guidance regarding adequate research reporting. https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25014017.