ArticleJournal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation2025
Aerodynamic-induced Effects of Artificial Subglottic Stenosis on Vocal Fold Model Phonatory Response.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effect of Subglottic Stenosis Severity on Vocal Fold Vibration and Voice Production in Realistic Laryngeal and Airway Geometries Using Fluid-Structure-Acoustics Interaction Simulation.Applied sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparison of Aerodynamic and Elastic Properties in Tissue and Synthetic Models of Vocal Fold Vibrations.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Synthetic, self-oscillating vocal fold models for voice production researcha).The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024Review
- Effect of Subglottic Stenosis on Expiratory Sound Using Direct Noise Calculation.Applied sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSubglottic stenosis (SGS) is characterized by a narrowing of the trachea near the cricotracheal junction and impairs breathing. SGS may also adversely affect voice quality, but for reasons that are not fully understood. The purpose of this study is to provide experiment-based data concerning the effects on phonation of airway obstruction due to SGS. STUDY
designBasic science
methodsA device simulating a SGS of adjustable severity ranging from 36% to 99.8% obstruction was created. Self-oscillating synthetic VF models were mounted downstream of the device and data were acquired to evaluate the effects of the obstruction on phonatory response.
resultsOnset pressures were relatively insensitive to obstructions of up to approximately 80% to 90% reductions in subglottic airway area and sharply increased thereafter. Flow rate (under conditions of constant pressure), flow resistance, and fundamental frequency all exhibited similar degrees of sensitivity to SGS obstruction as onset pressure. High-frequency noise became significant by 80% obstruction. Glottal area appeared to be less sensitive, not being affected until approximately 90% obstruction.
conclusionsConsistent with previous computational studies, this study found that aerodynamic, acoustic, and vibratory responses of self-oscillating VF models were largely unaffected by SGS until approximately 80% to 90% obstruction, and significantly affected at higher obstructions. This suggests that Grades I and II stenoses are unlikely to introduce subglottic airway aerodynamic disturbances that are sufficient in and of themselves to significantly alter phonatory output. The SGS model introduces a framework for future benchtop studies involving subglottic and supraglottic airway constrictions.
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.