ArticleJournal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation2025
Optimizing Diameter, Length, and Water Immersion in Flow Resistant Tube Vocalization.
Article in Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Study of Two Semi-Occluded Vocal Tract Protocols: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2024Trial
- Effects of Increasing Vocal Tract Insertion Depth in Semi-Occluded Vocal Tract Exercises on an Excised Canine Model.Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective was to quantify the range of airflow resistance and oral pressure attainable with variation of length, diameter, and water immersion depth of tubes and straws. STUDY
designPressure-flow equations for tubes, determined previously for variable tube geometries, were used to calculate oral pressure ranges. Human subjects were then recruited to use the variable tube geometries to produce oral pressures, which were quantified with commercial manometers.
resultsNomograms for airflow resistances and oral pressures are plotted as a function of tube length, tube diameter, and water insertion depth.
conclusionsIt is shown that tube diameters in the range of 2.5-3.0 mm with tube lengths of 10-40 cm produce oral pressures in the range of 10-40 cm H
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.