↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Functional dysphonia: strategies to improve patient outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Patient related outcome measures, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
131 Mendeley
Title
Functional dysphonia: strategies to improve patient outcomes
Published in
Patient related outcome measures, December 2015
DOI 10.2147/prom.s68631
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mara Behlau, Glaucya Madazio, Gisele Oliveira

Abstract

Functional dysphonia (FD) refers to a voice problem in the absence of a physical condition. It is a multifaceted voice disorder. There is no consensus with regard to its definition and inclusion criteria for diagnosis. FD has many predisposing and precipitating factors, which may include genetic susceptibility, psychological traits, and the vocal behavior itself. The assessment of voice disorders should be multidimensional. In addition to the clinical examination, auditory-perceptual, acoustic, and self-assessment analyses are very important. Self-assessment was introduced in the field of voice 25 years ago and has produced a major impact in the clinical and scientific scenario. The choice of treatment for FD is vocal rehabilitation by means of direct therapy; however, compliance has been an issue, except for cases of functional aphonia or when an intensive training is administered. Nevertheless, there are currently no controlled studies that have explored the different options of treatment regimens for these patients. Strategies to improve patient outcome involve proper multidisciplinary diagnosis in order to exclude neurological and psychiatric disorders, careful voice documentation with quantitative measurement and qualitative description of the vocal deviation for comparison after treatment, acoustic evaluation to gather data on the mechanism involved in voice production, self-assessment questionnaires to map the impact of the voice problem on the basis of the patient's perspective, referral to psychological evaluation in cases of suspected clinical anxiety and/or depression, identification of dysfunctional coping strategies, self-regulation data to assist patients with their vocal load, and direct and intensive vocal rehabilitation to reduce psychological resistance and to reassure patient's recovery. An international multicentric effort, involving a large population of voice-disordered patients with no physical pathology, could produce enough data for achieving a consensus regarding this complex problem.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 131 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 18%
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Professor 6 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 45 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 15%
Psychology 7 5%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Linguistics 3 2%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 49 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 December 2015.
All research outputs
#16,868,837
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Patient related outcome measures
#106
of 186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,568
of 396,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient related outcome measures
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 396,604 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.