Comparative Analysis of Two Methods of Perceptual Voice Assessment.
Hagar Feinstein, Ümit Daşdöğen, Jordan A Awan and 2 others
PMID 36907680WHAT IT FOUND
Visual Analog Scales (VAS) were more consistent and predictable than Paired Comparisons (PC) for rating children's voice therapy outcomes.
Severity and resonance were weakly related, so improved resonance does not guarantee reduced overall voice severity.
Key findings
01VAS and PC-CA methods are not interchangeable for rating severity or resonance, as they correlate only moderately and cannot reliably predict each other.
02VAS showed better consistency across raters than PC-CA, with scores clustering around the mean, while PC-CA scores were widely distributed.
03There is a weak correlation between severity and resonance ratings, meaning improvement in one does not predict improvement in the other.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included a very small sample of only six children, which limits generalizability. Only sustained vowels were used, which may not capture resonance changes as well as connected speech. The study was exploratory and did not test why severity and resonance correlations were weak. Rater experience was measured only in years, not by the type of clinical exposure.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that VAS and PC methods yield equivalent results or that improved resonance scores guarantee improved overall voice severity. The methods are not interchangeable, and the two voice dimensions are weakly related.