Trial reportJournal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation2025
Vocal Function Exercises With and Without Maximally Sustained Phonation: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Individuals With Normal Voice.
Trial report 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Family-Involved Hybrid Voice Therapy for Pediatric Vocal Fold Nodules in School-Aged Children: Clinical Outcomes and Socioeconomic Associations.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- Effect of Vocal Function Exercises on the Voice Handicap Index, Vocal Fatigue Index, and Number of Vocal Fatigue Symptoms in Bank Workers: Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2024Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the effect of maximally sustained phonation on efficacy of Vocal Function Exercises as measured by percent of maximum phonation time goal attained. The hypothesis was that maximally sustained phonation would result in greater improvements in percent of maximum phonation time goal attained. STUDY
designRandomized controlled trial.
methodsA convenience sample of individuals with normal voice were recruited in a university academic clinic setting. Of 34 participants who volunteered for the study, 31 completed baseline assessment and 23 completed all study procedures. Participants were randomized to complete Vocal Function Exercises (traditional group TG), modified Vocal Function Exercises with reduced requirement for maximally sustained phonation (midpoint group MG), or modified Vocal Function Exercises with removed requirement for maximally sustained phonation (baseline group BG). The primary outcome measure was percent of maximum phonation time goal obtained during Vocal Function Exercises.
resultsThe MG (p = 0.008) and TG (p = 0.001) groups significantly improved percent of maximum phonation time goal attained after six weeks of exercise, while the BG group (p = 0.0202) did not (ɑ = 0.0125). Difference among groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.67, ɑ = 0.0125). Hedges' g effect sizes of 0.29 (-0.66, 1.25) and 0.51 (-0.57, 1.58) were obtained comparing MG and TG groups, and BG and TG groups, respectively.
conclusionsGreater requirements for maximally sustained phonation improved efficacy of Vocal Function Exercises in enhancing normal voice as measured by percent of maximum phonation time goal attained. Maximally sustained phonation may be modified to some extent while preserving efficacy of Vocal Function Exercises, however complete elimination of maximally sustained phonation may attenuate improvement. Additional research in a clinical population is warranted.
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.