ArticleHNO2009
[Grading of the voice-related quality of life index].
Article in HNO, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Salvage transoral laser microsurgery for early local recurrence of glottic squamous cell cancer.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2023Article
- Subjective Perception and Psychoacoustic Aspects of the Laryngectomee Voice: The Impact on Quality of Life.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Analysis of Postsurgical Health-Related Quality of Life and Quality of Voice of Patients With Laryngeal Carcinoma.Medicine · 2016Observational
- Voice handicap index and voice-related quality of life in small laryngeal carcinoma.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2011Article
- [Quality of life in dysphonia].HNO · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the voice-related quality of life (VRQOL) questionnaire has proved to be an appropriate diagnostic tool, there are no recommendations on how to grade the score. In this study the VRQOL was graded against the background of health-related quality of life. PATIENTS AND
methodsA total of 105 patients (56 women and 49 men) aged 49.4+/-16.1 years who presented with dysphonia of benign origin completed a German version of the VRQOL and the SF-36 health survey after giving informed consent. There was an organic disorder in 50%, in 37% a functional disorder and 13% had no disorder.
resultsThe only difference between the results of the VRQOL and the SF-36 was in the subscale on social functioning which showed a moderately strong (r(S)=0.40) and highly significant reduction in dysphonic patients (p<0.001). These results were therefore used as an external criterion for the graduation of the VRQOL results. The data suggest that VRQOL values of 0-40 can be classified as "clinically relevant deterioration", values of 41-80 as "no clinically relevant deterioration" and values over 80 as "normal" voice-related quality of life".
conclusionsThe suggested grading system simplifies the assessment of individual VRQOL values. Now their clinical relevance as indication and end-point parameters must be investigated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.