Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26664248›Full record

ReviewPatient related outcome measures2015

Functional dysphonia: strategies to improve patient outcomes.

Mara Behlau, Glaucya Madazio, Gisele Oliveira

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Patient related outcome measures, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Glottal function index as a brief screening tool: Determination of an optimal cutoff score for functional dysphonia.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 · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Web-Based Perceived Present Control Intervention for Voice Disorders: A Pilot Study.Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2020
    Article
  13. GALP Qualifier Scale: Initial Considerations to Classify a Voice Problem.Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP) · 2020
    Article
  14. Dysphonia, Perceived Control, and Psychosocial Distress: A Qualitative Study.Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2019
    Article
  15. Self-perception of quality of life in patients with functional voice disorders: the effects of psychological and vocal acoustic variables.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 · 2018
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Perceived control and voice handicap in patients with voice disorders.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2017
    Article
  18. Factors Influencing Likelihood of Voice Therapy Attendance.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2017
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mara BehlauVoice Department, Centro de Estudos da Voz - CEV, São Paulo, Brazil.
Glaucya MadazioVoice Department, Centro de Estudos da Voz - CEV, São Paulo, Brazil.
Gisele OliveiraVoice Department, Centro de Estudos da Voz - CEV, São Paulo, Brazil.
Centro de Estudos da Voz · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional dysphonia (FD) refers to a voice problem in the absence of a physical condition. It is a multifaceted voice disorder. There is no consensus with regard to its definition and inclusion criteria for diagnosis. FD has many predisposing and precipitating factors, which may include genetic susceptibility, psychological traits, and the vocal behavior itself. The assessment of voice disorders should be multidimensional. In addition to the clinical examination, auditory-perceptual, acoustic, and self-assessment analyses are very important. Self-assessment was introduced in the field of voice 25 years ago and has produced a major impact in the clinical and scientific scenario. The choice of treatment for FD is vocal rehabilitation by means of direct therapy; however, compliance has been an issue, except for cases of functional aphonia or when an intensive training is administered. Nevertheless, there are currently no controlled studies that have explored the different options of treatment regimens for these patients. Strategies to improve patient outcome involve proper multidisciplinary diagnosis in order to exclude neurological and psychiatric disorders, careful voice documentation with quantitative measurement and qualitative description of the vocal deviation for comparison after treatment, acoustic evaluation to gather data on the mechanism involved in voice production, self-assessment questionnaires to map the impact of the voice problem on the basis of the patient's perspective, referral to psychological evaluation in cases of suspected clinical anxiety and/or depression, identification of dysfunctional coping strategies, self-regulation data to assist patients with their vocal load, and direct and intensive vocal rehabilitation to reduce psychological resistance and to reassure patient's recovery. An international multicentric effort, involving a large population of voice-disordered patients with no physical pathology, could produce enough data for achieving a consensus regarding this complex problem.

Indexed as

dysphoniaevaluationpatient-related outcomesquality of lifevoicevoice handicap

Identifiers

PMID26664248
PMCPMC4671799
OpenAlexW2184760858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.