Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37707614›Full record

ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2023

Consensus for voice quality assessment in clinical practice: guidelines of the European Laryngological Society and Union of the European Phoniatricians.

Jerome R Lechien, Ahmed Geneid, Jörg E Bohlender, Giovanna Cantarella, Juan C Avellaneda, Gauthier Desuter, Elisabeth V Sjogren, Camille Finck, Stephane Hans, Markus Hess and 9 more

Open access · greenAbstract readConsensus Statement
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. European clinical practice guideline: managing and treating laryngopharyngeal reflux disease.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 · 2026
    Guideline
  2. 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
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. An easy-to-use laryngostroboscopy index for unilateral vocal fold paralysis reflects voice quality.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 · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Patient-reported handicap, perceptual grade, and presbylarynx type drive subjective therapeutic choice in presbyphonia.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 · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Outcomes of Voice Therapy in Behavioral Voice Disorders: A Scoping Review-Part A.Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Voice outcomes after office-based hyaluronic acid injection for vocal fold immobility: a prospective single-center study.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 · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Using a Vortex Whistle System to Estimate Phonatory Airflow via the Phonation Quotient.Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2025
    Article
  19. [Advances in the assessment and management of voice disorders].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2025
    Review
  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

19 authors at 15 institutions in 13 countries.

Jerome R Lechien *Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Foch Hospital, University of Paris Saclay, Paris, France. jerome.lechien@umons.ac.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0845-0845
Ahmed Geneid *Department of Otolaryngology and Phoniatrics-Head and Neck Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Jörg E BohlenderDepartment of Phoniatrics and Speech Pathology, Clinic for Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Giovanna CantarellaDepartment of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery Fondazione, IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Juan C AvellanedaDepartment of Surgery, Otolaryngology Service. Hospital Universitario Mayor Mederi, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, Colombia.
Gauthier DesuterENT, Head and Neck Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Elisabeth V SjogrenDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Camille FinckDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, CHU de Liege, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Stephane HansDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Foch Hospital, University of Paris Saclay, Paris, France.
Markus HessMedical Voice Center (MEVOC), Hamburg, Germany.
Haldun OguzDepartment of Otolaryngology, Fonomer, Ankara, Turkey.
Marc J RemacleDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Foch Hospital, University of Paris Saclay, Paris, France.
Berit Schneider-SticklerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology Medical, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Miroslav TedlaDepartment of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Comenius University, University Hospital, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Antonio SchindlerDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Isabel VilasecaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Michal ZabrodskyDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Motol, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Frederik G Dikkers *Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location AMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lise Crevier-Buchman *Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Foch Hospital, University of Paris Saclay, Paris, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRUniversity of Milan · ITAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLAntwerp University Hospital · BECentre Hospitalier de Luxembourg · LUCharles University · CZHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESLeiden University Medical Center · NLMedical University of Vienna · ATSmall and Medium Enterprises Development Organization · TRUniversidad del Rosario · COUniversity Hospital Bratislava · SKUniversity of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Liège · BEUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo update the European guidelines for the assessment of voice quality (VQ) in clinical practice.

methodsNineteen laryngologists-phoniatricians of the European Laryngological Society (ELS) and the Union of the European Phoniatricians (UEP) participated to a modified Delphi process to propose statements about subjective and objective VQ assessments. Two anonymized voting rounds determined a consensus statement to be acceptable when 80% of experts agreed with a rating of at least 3/4. The statements with ≥ 3/4 score by 60-80% of experts were improved and resubmitted to voting until they were validated or rejected.

resultsOf the 90 initial statements, 51 were validated after two voting rounds. A multidimensional set of minimal VQ evaluations was proposed and included: baseline VQ anamnesis (e.g., allergy, medical and surgical history, medication, addiction, singing practice, job, and posture), videolaryngostroboscopy (mucosal wave symmetry, amplitude, morphology, and movements), patient-reported VQ assessment (30- or 10-voice handicap index), perception (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, and Strain), aerodynamics (maximum phonation time), acoustics (Mean F0, Jitter, Shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio), and clinical instruments associated with voice comorbidities (reflux symptom score, reflux sign assessment, eating-assessment tool-10, and dysphagia handicap index). For perception, aerodynamics and acoustics, experts provided guidelines for the methods of measurement. Some additional VQ evaluations are proposed for voice professionals or patients with some laryngeal diseases.

conclusionThe ELS-UEP consensus for VQ assessment provides clinical statements for the baseline and pre- to post-treatment evaluations of VQ and to improve collaborative research by adopting common and validated VQ evaluation approach.

Indexed as

Laryngeal DiseasesOtolaryngologyVoiceHumansTreatment OutcomeVoice QualityAssessmentConsensusDysphoniaEuropeanEvaluationGuidelinesHeadNeckOtolaryngologySurgeryVoice

Identifiers

PMID37707614
OpenAlexW4386726848

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.