Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38696537›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2024

Vowel onset measures and their reliability, sensitivity and specificity: A systematic literature review.

Antonia Margarita Chacon, Duy Duong Nguyen, John Holik, Michael Döllinger, Tomás Arias-Vergara, Catherine Jeanette Madill

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Biophysics of Voice Onset: A Comprehensive Overview.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  3. Investigation Methods for Vocal Onset-A Historical Perspective.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Antonia Margarita ChaconVoice Research Laboratory/ Doctor Liang Voice Program, Discipline of Speech Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2902-659X
Duy Duong NguyenVoice Research Laboratory/ Doctor Liang Voice Program, Discipline of Speech Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
John HolikVoice Research Laboratory/ Doctor Liang Voice Program, Discipline of Speech Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Michael DöllingerDivision of Phoniatrics and Paediatric Audiology at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bavaria, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2717-4820
Tomás Arias-VergaraDivision of Phoniatrics and Paediatric Audiology at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bavaria, Germany.
Catherine Jeanette MadillVoice Research Laboratory/ Doctor Liang Voice Program, Discipline of Speech Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo systematically evaluate the evidence for the reliability, sensitivity and specificity of existing measures of vowel-initial voice onset.

methodsA literature search was conducted across electronic databases for published studies (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, PubMed Central, IEEE Xplore) and grey literature (ProQuest for unpublished dissertations) measuring vowel onset. Eligibility criteria included research of any study design type or context focused on measuring human voice onset on an initial vowel. Two independent reviewers were involved at each stage of title and abstract screening, data extraction and analysis. Data extracted included measures used, their reliability, sensitivity and specificity. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE as the data of interest was extracted.

resultsThe search retrieved 6,983 records. Titles and abstracts were screened against the inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers, with a third reviewer responsible for conflict resolution. Thirty-five papers were included in the review, which identified five categories of voice onset measurement: auditory perceptual, acoustic, aerodynamic, physiological and visual imaging. Reliability was explored in 14 papers with varied reliability ratings, while sensitivity was rarely assessed, and no assessment of specificity was conducted across any of the included records. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate with high variability in methodology and voice onset measures used.

conclusionsA range of vowel-initial voice onset measurements have been applied throughout the literature, however, there is a lack of evidence regarding their sensitivity, specificity and reliability in the detection and discrimination of voice onset types. Heterogeneity in study populations and methods used preclude conclusions on the most valid measures. There is a clear need for standardisation of research methodology, and for future studies to examine the practicality of these measures in research and clinical settings.

Indexed as

Sensitivity and SpecificityHumansReproducibility of ResultsVoice

Identifiers

PMID38696537
PMCPMC11065290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.