SLPSurveyJournal of communication disorders2025

Prevalence and associated factors of voice symptoms among Mexican prospective teachers: A cross-sectional study.

Lady Catherine Cantor-Cutiva, Carlos Manzano, Eric J Hunter

PMID 40412042

WHAT IT FOUND

Prevalence of voice symptoms in prospective teachers varied widely by tool, from 9.13% to 54.60%.

Perceived dust in placement classrooms was consistently linked to higher symptom reports. Third-year students and those in active placements reported more discomfort.

Key findings

01The prevalence of voice symptoms ranged from 9.13% (SIVD) to 54.60% (VFI physical discomfort) depending on the assessment tool used.

02Perceived dust in the practicum placement environment was significantly associated with increased likelihood of voice symptoms across multiple measures.

03Prospective teachers in their third year of training and those currently in a practicum placement reported higher likelihood of physical discomfort associated with voicing.

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The cross-sectional design prevents determining cause and effect; it is unclear if the conditions cause the symptoms or if those with symptoms perceive conditions differently. Prevalence rates varied drastically (9.13% to 54.60%) depending on the tool used, making it difficult to define the true scope of the problem without a standardised metric. Data relied entirely on self-report, which may be influenced by students' awareness of their voice use rather than clinical pathology. The study was conducted in Mexico, so findings may not generalise to teacher training programs with different environmental or curricular structures.

Declared interests

The paper does not explicitly state a funding source or conflicts of interest declaration in the provided text.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume that a high prevalence rate (e.g., 54.60%) indicates a clinical disorder requiring treatment; this figure reflects self-reported physical discomfort on a specific scale. The wide variation in prevalence across tools means no single number represents the true burden of voice problems in this population.

Read it on PubMed →

Prevalence and associated factors of voice symptoms among Mexican prospective teachers: A cross-sectional study. — Applied Evidence