Observational studyCoDAS2023
Opinion of speech-language pathologist on the use of photobiomodulation in the vocal clinic.
Observational study in CoDAS, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of photobiomodulation on viability and proliferation of squamous cell carcinoma in vitro.Lasers in medical science · 2025Article
- Photobiomodulation on vocal training and rehabilitation: Delphi consensus based on experts.CoDAS · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeto investigate the opinion of Brazilian speech-language pathologists on the training, performance, and parameters used for the application of photobiomodulation (PBM) in the vocal clinic.
methodsobservational, cross-sectional, and quantitative study, carried out through a web survey hosted on the Google Forms digital platform, composed of questions related to training, professional performance, and knowledge about PBM in the voice area. Twenty-nine speech-language pathologists of both sexes participated. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.
resultsall participants knew the theoretical foundations of PBM, and among them, 28 (96.6%) knew its use specifically in the voice area; twenty-five respondents (86.2%) had a device to perform the irradiation, and all of them used it routinely in their clinical practice in voice. The majority (96.6%, 28) participated in a PBM training course, including specific approaches to the voice area. Participants stated that PBM is a resource that can be used in the area of voice to improve performance in sung (86.2%, 25) and spoken (82.8%, 24), in addition to its application in cases of inflammatory processes in the vocal folds (79.3%, 23). As for dosimetry parameters, the most used wavelength was 808 - 830nm (37.9%, 11) and 660/808nm simultaneously (37.9%, 11), with a dose of 3-5 J per point for the patients with inflammatory processes in the vocal folds (51.7%, 15) and 6-9 J (44.8%, 13) per point for patients whose objective was improvement/conditioning.
conclusionthe study participants demonstrated knowledge and training in PBM and its applicability to the voice area.
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.