↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The electrolarynx: voice restoration after total laryngectomy

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#14 of 303)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
Title
The electrolarynx: voice restoration after total laryngectomy
Published in
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, June 2017
DOI 10.2147/mder.s133225
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel Kaye, Christopher G Tang, Catherine F Sinclair

Abstract

The ability to speak and communicate with one's voice is a unique human characteristic and is fundamental to many activities of daily living, such as talking on the phone and speaking to loved ones. When the larynx is removed during a total laryngectomy (TL), loss of voice can lead to a devastating decrease in a patient's quality of life, and precipitate significant frustration over their inability to communicate with others effectively. Over the past 50 years there have been many advances in techniques of voice restoration after TL. Currently, there are three main methods of voice restoration: the electrolarynx, esophageal speech, and tracheoesophageal speech through a tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) with voice prosthesis. Although TEP voice is the current gold standard for vocal rehabilitation, a significant minority of patients cannot use or obtain TEP speech for various reasons. As such, the electrolarynx is a viable and useful alternative for these patients. This article will focus on voice restoration using an electrolarynx with the following objectives: 1) To provide an understanding of the importance of voice restoration after total laryngectomy. 2) To discuss how the electrolarynx may be used to restore voice following total laryngectomy. 3) To outline some of the current electrolarynx devices available, including their mechanism of action and limitations. 4) To compare pros and cons of electrolaryngeal speech to TEP and esophageal speech.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 16%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 37 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 25%
Engineering 16 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Linguistics 5 4%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 42 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 March 2022.
All research outputs
#862,914
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#14
of 303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,574
of 331,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,010 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them