ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2025
Qualitative Analysis of Speech-Language Pathologists' Voice Evaluation Practices and Perspectives.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Vocal Fold Vibratory Kinematics and Acoustic Correlates in Pressed and Breathy Phonation.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the structure of voice evaluations and gather clinicians' opinions on the barriers to and benefits of using acoustic measures in these evaluations. A secondary goal was to investigate how clinicians assess strain and vocal effort.
methodFifteen voice-specialized speech-language pathologists from voice centers around the United States were interviewed to query their current voice evaluation practice patterns and opinions on acoustic measures. They were also asked how they evaluate strain and vocal effort. Thematic analysis was performed by two researchers based on the recorded interviews.
resultsDifferences among practitioners were found in almost every component of the evaluation. Four themes related to barriers to and benefits of implementing acoustic measures in a voice evaluation were identified: Collecting and analyzing acoustic measures (a) take time, (b) do not inform therapy patterns, (c) allow for the most accurate comparison, and (d) supplement patient-centered care. Three themes emerged related to evaluating vocal effort and strain: Clinicians (a) lack consensus on objective measures of strain, (b) use more than just auditory perception to evaluate strain, and (c) assess vocal effort in different ways.
conclusionsAlthough some speech-language pathologists view acoustic assessment as the gold standard for guiding therapeutic decisions, others believe it may not be strictly necessary for delivering effective voice therapy. Variations in the assessment of strain and vocal effort across voice clinics suggest a need for additional research in this area. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.29391725.
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.