Observational studyMedicine2018
Effect of voice rehabilitation training on the patients with laryngeal cancer after radiotherapy.
Observational study in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Patient-Reported Outcomes and Functional Recovery After Treatment for Laryngeal Cancer: A Scoping Review of Instruments, Domains, and Clinical Integration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This retrospective study examined the effect of voice rehabilitation training (VRT) for patients with laryngeal cancer (LC) after radiotherapy.Eighty-three eligible patients with LC were included. Forty-three patients were assigned to a treatment group, and underwent VRT, while the other 40 subjects were assigned to a control group, and were at waiting list. Primary outcome was measured by the Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, and Strain (GRBAS) scale. Secondary outcome was measured by Patient Perception Measures. All outcomes were measured before and 3 months after VRT intervention.Patients in the treatment group did not show better outcomes, measured by GRBAS scale (Grade, P = .78; Roughness, P = .61; Breathiness, P = .83; Ashenia, P = .89; and Strain, P = .41), and Patient Perception Measures (Vocal quality, P = .17; Acceptability, P = .35; Hoarseness, P = .23; Vocal fatigue, P = .39; and Ashamed, P = .51), compared with patients in the control group.The results of this study did not exert better outcomes in patients received VRT than those at waiting list.
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.