Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28030869›Full record

SynthesisJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2017

Voice-Related Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review of Instrument Development and Validation.

David O Francis, James J Daniero, Kristen L Hovis, Nila Sathe, Barbara Jacobson, David F Penson, Irene D Feurer, Melissa L McPheeters

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06443073 (The Mere-measurement Effect in Patient-reported Outcomes), which is not on this map. Cited by 24 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06443073 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

The Mere-measurement Effect in Patient-reported Outcomes: A Randomized Control Trial With Speech Pathology Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorMedical University of ViennaRan2024 to 2025Enrolled170ConditionsMeasurement, Psychological Stress, Speech Disorders, Assessment, SelfArmsPatient-reported outcomes for speech disorders: positive
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Glottic insufficiency caused by vocal fold atrophy with or without sulcus: systematic review of outcome measurements.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 · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Measurement properties of self-report questionnaires on health-related quality of life and functional health status in dysphonia: a systematic review using the COSMIN taxonomy.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Development, validity, and reliability of the Parkinson's voice and speech handicap index (PaVSHI).Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. What do the voice-related parameters tell us? The multiparametric index scores, cepstral-based methods, patient-reported outcomes, and durational measurements.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 · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Behind the Headset: Predictive Accuracy of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Voice Symptoms in Call Centers.Revista de investigacion e innovacion en ciencias de la salud : RIICS · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

8 authors.

David O FrancisVanderbilt Voice Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Bill Wilkerson Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TNCenter for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Nashville, TNVanderbilt Evidence-Based Practice Center, Nashville, TN.
James J DanieroCenter for Voice and Swallowing, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
Kristen L HovisVanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
Nila SatheVanderbilt Evidence-Based Practice Center, Nashville, TNVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TNDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Barbara JacobsonDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, Bill Wilkerson Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
David F PensonCenter for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Nashville, TNVanderbilt Evidence-Based Practice Center, Nashville, TNDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TNDepartments of Urology and Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TNGeriatric Research and Education Coordination Center, Veteran's Administration Tennessee Valley Health System, Geriatric Research and Education Coordination Center, Nashville, TN.
Irene D FeurerCenter for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Nashville, TNDepartments of Surgery and Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Melissa L McPheetersVanderbilt Evidence-Based Practice Center, Nashville, TNDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.

Funding

Developing an Outcome Measuring Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis DisabilityK23DC013559 · NIDCD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI FRANCIS, DAVID O. · 2014 to 2018
$990k
NIDCD NIH HHS K23 DC013559NIDCD NIH HHS L30 DC012687
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive systematic review of the literature on voice-related patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in adults and to evaluate each instrument for the presence of important measurement properties. Method: MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Health and Psychosocial Instrument databases were searched using relevant vocabulary terms and key terms related to PRO measures and voice. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed in consultation with an expert panel. Three independent investigators assessed study methodology using criteria developed a priori. Measurement properties were examined and entered into evidence tables. Results: A total of 3,744 studies assessing voice-related constructs were identified. This list was narrowed to 32 PRO measures on the basis of predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Questionnaire measurement properties varied widely. Important thematic deficiencies were apparent: (a) lack of patient involvement in the item development process, (b) lack of robust construct validity, and (c) lack of clear interpretability and scaling. Conclusions: PRO measures are a principal means of evaluating treatment effectiveness in voice-related conditions. Despite their prominence, available PRO measures have disparate methodological rigor. Care must be taken to understand the psychometric and measurement properties and the applicability of PRO measures before advocating for their use in clinical or research applications.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresVoiceHumansValidation Studies as TopicVoice Disorders

Identifiers

PMID28030869
PMCPMC5533561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.