Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2024
Lee Silverman voice treatment versus NHS speech and language therapy versus control for dysarthria in people with Parkinson's disease (PD COMM): pragmatic, UK based, multicentre, three arm, parallel group, unblinded, randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- "YiJinJing, Wohu Pushi" Posture-Voice Therapy for Dysarthria in Parkinson's Disease Patients Following Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Trial
- Speech Treatment for People with Cerebellar Multiple System Atrophy (MSA-C): A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial of Two Approaches.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2025Trial
- The PD COMM Process Evaluation: Describing Interventions and Implementation in a UK Pragmatic Randomised Controlled Trial of Speech and Language Therapy for People With Parkinson's-Related Dysarthria.International journal of language & communication disordersTrial
- Parkinson's Disease Multidisciplinary Complex Therapy (PD-MCT): appreciation of its current function for the treatment of people with Parkinson's disease in Germany and the needs of future development.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2026Review
- Exploring Speech and Language Therapists' Perspectives of Voice-Assisted Technology as a Tool for Dysarthria: Qualitative Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Article
- Exploring the Perceptions of Voice-Assisted Technology as a Tool for Speech and Voice Difficulties: Focus Group Study Among People With Parkinson Disease and Their Carers.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Article
- [Clinical diagnosis and treatment of pitch-related disorders].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the clinical effectiveness of two speech and language therapy approaches versus no speech and language therapy for dysarthria in people with Parkinson's disease.
designPragmatic, UK based, multicentre, three arm, parallel group, unblinded, randomised controlled trial.
settingThe speech and language therapy interventions were delivered in outpatient or home settings between 26 September 2016 and 16 March 2020.
participants388 people with Parkinson's disease and dysarthria.
interventionsParticipants were randomly assigned to one of three groups (1:1:1): 130 to Lee Silverman voice treatment (LSVT LOUD), 129 to NHS speech and language therapy, and 129 to no speech and language therapy. LSVT LOUD consisted of four, face-to-face or remote, 50 min sessions each week delivered over four weeks. Home based practice activities were set for up to 5-10 mins daily on treatment days and 15 mins twice daily on non-treatment days. Dosage for the NHS speech and language therapy was determined by the local therapist in response to the participants' needs (estimated from prior research that NHS speech and language therapy participants would receive an average of one session per week over six to eight weeks). Local practices for NHS speech and language therapy were accepted, except for those within the LSVT LOUD protocol. Analyses were based on the intention to treat principle.
main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was total score at three months of self-reported voice handicap index.
resultsPeople who received LSVT LOUD reported lower voice handicap index scores at three months after randomisation than those who did not receive speech and language therapy (-8.0 points (99% confidence interval -13.3 to -2.6); P<0.001). No evidence suggests a difference in voice handicap index scores between NHS speech and language therapy and no speech and language therapy (1.7 points (-3.8 to 7.1); P=0.43). Patients in the LSVT LOUD group also reported lower voice handicap index scores than did those randomised to NHS speech and language therapy (-9.6 points (-14.9 to -4.4); P<0.001). 93 adverse events (predominately vocal strain) were reported in the LSVT LOUD group, 46 in the NHS speech and language therapy group, and none in the no speech and language therapy group. No serious adverse events were recorded.
conclusionsLSVT LOUD was more effective at reducing the participant reported impact of voice problems than was no speech and language therapy and NHS speech and language therapy. NHS speech and language therapy showed no evidence of benefit compared with no speech and language therapy.
trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN12421382.
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.