↓ Skip to main content

Using Innovative Acoustic Analysis to Predict the Postoperative Outcomes of Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis

Overview of attention for article published in BioMed Research International, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Using Innovative Acoustic Analysis to Predict the Postoperative Outcomes of Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis
Published in
BioMed Research International, September 2016
DOI 10.1155/2016/7821415
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yung-An Tsou, Yi-Wen Liu, Wen-Dien Chang, Wei-Chen Chen, Hsiang-Chun Ke, Wen-Yang Lin, Hsing-Rong Yang, Dung-Yun Shie, Ming-Hsui Tsai

Abstract

Objective. Autologous fat injection laryngoplasty is ineffective for some patients with iatrogenic vocal fold paralysis, and additional laryngeal framework surgery is often required. An acoustically measurable outcome predictor for lipoinjection laryngoplasty would assist phonosurgeons in formulating treatment strategies. Methods. Seventeen thyroid surgery patients with unilateral vocal fold paralysis participated in this study. All subjects underwent lipoinjection laryngoplasty to treat postsurgery vocal hoarseness. After treatment, patients were assigned to success and failure groups on the basis of voice improvement. Linear prediction analysis was used to construct a new voice quality indicator, the number of irregular peaks (NIrrP). It compared with the measures used in the Multi-Dimensional Voice Program (MDVP), such as jitter (frequency perturbation) and shimmer (perturbation of amplitude). Results. By comparing the [i] vowel produced by patients before the lipoinjection laryngoplasty (AUC = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.78-0.99), NIrrP was shown to be a more accurate predictor of long-term surgical outcomes than jitter (AUC = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.47-0.91) and shimmer (AUC = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.37-0.85), as identified by the receiver operating characteristic curve. Conclusions. NIrrP measured using the LP model could be a more accurate outcome predictor than the parameters used in the MDVP.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Master 4 11%
Researcher 2 5%
Librarian 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 12 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BioMed Research International
#5,209
of 10,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,407
of 328,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMed Research International
#83
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,759 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. 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 328,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.