ArticleFrontiers in physiology2024
Optimal vocal therapy for respiratory muscle activation in patients with COPD: effects of loudness, pitch, and vowels.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Singing as training modality within pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD patients may enhance diaphragmatic function: a pilot RCT exploring impact on diaphragmatic mobility and thickness.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Trial
- Effect of music-guided breathing training combined with singing on pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD patients: a randomized controlled trial protocol.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- EEG oscillations and related brain generators of phonation phases in long utterances.Scientific reports · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vocal therapy, such as singing training, is an increasingly popular pulmonary rehabilitation program that has improved respiratory muscle status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, variations in singing treatment protocols have led to inconsistent clinical outcomes. Objective: This study aims to explore the content of vocalization training for patients with COPD by observing differences in respiratory muscle activation across different vocalization tasks. Methods: All participants underwent measurement of surface electromyography (sEMG) activity from the sternocleidomastoid (SCM), parasternal intercostal muscle (PARA), seventh intercostal muscle (7thIC), and rectus abdominis (RA) during the production of the vowels/a/,/i/, and/u/at varying pitches (comfortable, +6 semitones) and loudness (-10 dB, +10 dB) levels. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the condition of patients concerning vocalization, while the Borg-CR10 breathlessness scale was utilized to gauge the level of dyspnea following the task. Repeated-measure (RM) ANOVA was utilized to analyze the EMG data of respiratory muscles and the Borg scale across different tasks. Results: Forty-one patients completed the experiment. Neural respiratory drive (NRD) in the SCM muscle did not significantly increase at high loudness levels (VAS 7-8) compared with that at low loudness levels ( Conclusion: In contrast to pitch or vowel, vocal loudness emerges as a critical factor for vocalization training in patients with COPD. Higher pitch and loudness produced more dyspnea than lower pitch and loudness. In addition, maximal expiratory/inspiratory pressure was negatively correlated with respiratory muscle NRD in the same loudness vocalization task.
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.