SLPOtherDevelopmental medicine and child neurology2026

The Pediatric Screening-Priority Evaluation Dysphagia: Validation of a new tool for screening swallowing disorders in infants and children.

Antonella Cerchiari, Giorgia Biondo, Fausto Maria Fassari and 6 others

PMID 40542510

WHAT IT FOUND

The PS-PED screening tool accurately identifies dysphagia risk in children using medical records.

A score of 5 or less rules out low risk with 98% sensitivity, while a score of 6 or more flags at-risk cases with 95% sensitivity. It does not require child cooperation.

Key findings

01The PS-PED is a 14-item tool scored from medical records that correlates with gold-standard swallow assessments.

02A PS-PED score of 5 or less identified children with no airway invasion with 98% sensitivity, while a score of 6 or more identified those with aspiration with 95% sensitivity.

03The tool showed perfect agreement between raters (ICC 1.00) and satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.716).

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Single-centre study at a major paediatric hospital, so results may not apply to other settings. Interrater reliability was assessed only by experienced speech therapists specializing in dysphagia, which may overestimate agreement for less specialized staff. Cut-off values were derived from a heterogeneous population; specific cut-offs for different diagnostic groups (e.g., neurological vs. genetic) were not established. The study did not assess the relative weight of individual items (e.g., whether tracheostomy predicts risk more strongly than other factors).

Declared interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The study was funded by the Italian Ministry of Health.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret a PS-PED score below 5 as proof that a child has no swallowing disorder. The tool prioritizes sensitivity to avoid missing cases, so a low score does not eliminate risk if clinical suspicion remains, and referral for assessment should still occur if symptoms persist.

Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →