↓ Skip to main content

Vocal warm-up and breathing training for teachers: randomized clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Revista de Saúde Pública, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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.
Title
Vocal warm-up and breathing training for teachers: randomized clinical trial
Published in
Revista de Saúde Pública, October 2015
DOI 10.1590/s0034-8910.2015049005716
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lílian Paternostro de Pina Pereira, Maria Lúcia Vaz Masson, Fernando Martins Carvalho

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To compare the effectiveness of two speech therapy interventions, vocal warm-up and breathing training, focusing on teachers' voice quality.METHODS A single-blind, randomized, parallel clinical trial was conducted. The research included 31 20 to 60-year old teachers from a public school in Salvador, BA, Northeasatern Brazil, with minimum workloads of 20 hours a week, who have or have not reported having vocal alterations. The exclusion criteria were the following: being a smoker, excessive alcohol consumption, receiving additional speech therapy assistance while taking part in the study, being affected by upper respiratory tract infections, professional use of the voice in another activity, neurological disorders, and history of cardiopulmonary pathologies. The subjects were distributed through simple randomization in groups vocal warm-up (n = 14) and breathing training (n = 17). The teachers' voice quality was subjectively evaluated through the Voice Handicap Index (Índice de Desvantagem Vocal, in the Brazilian version) and computerized voice analysis (average fundamental frequency, jitter, shimmer, noise, and glottal-to-noise excitation ratio) by speech therapists.RESULTS Before the interventions, the groups were similar regarding sociodemographic characteristics, teaching activities, and vocal quality. The variations before and after the intervention in self-assessment and acoustic voice indicators have not significantly differed between the groups. In the comparison between groups before and after the six-week interventions, significant reductions in the Voice Handicap Index of subjects in both groups were observed, as wells as reduced average fundamental frequencies in the vocal warm-up group and increased shimmer in the breathing training group. Subjects from the vocal warm-up group reported speaking more easily and having their voices more improved in a general way as compared to the breathing training group.CONCLUSIONS Both interventions were similar regarding their effects on the teachers' voice quality. However, each contribution has individually contributed to improve the teachers' voice quality, especially the vocal warm-up.TRIAL RECORD NCT02102399, "Vocal Warm-up and Respiratory Muscle Training in Teachers".

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 125 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Master 13 10%
Researcher 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 6%
Other 25 20%
Unknown 47 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 12%
Social Sciences 9 7%
Psychology 7 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 54 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 January 2023.
All research outputs
#14,278,325
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Revista de Saúde Pública
#454
of 1,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,137
of 290,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista de Saúde Pública
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,138 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 290,716 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.