MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206257192 · doi:10.1044/2021_jslhr-21-00056

Outcomes of Gender Affirming Voice Training: A Comparison of Hybrid and Individual Training Modules

2022· article· en· W4206257192 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraining (meteorology)Voice TrainingNonverbal communicationSpeech therapyVoice therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Gender affirming voice training supports individuals as they explore and develop a healthy voice that feels congruent with their gender and sense of self. Although gender affirming voice training is increasingly available, there is no research comparing individual versus hybrid training outcomes in the existing literature. METHOD: A retrospective chart review was performed on trans women and/or nonbinary individuals who attended either individual or hybrid (group and individual training) gender affirming voice and communication training at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto between 2012 and 2019. Participant demographics, self-reported goal achievement, attendance, pre/post-Trans Woman Voice Questionnaire (TWVQ) scores, and pre/postspeaking fundamental frequency (SFF) were compared between individual and hybrid training participants. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors that could predict self-reported goal achievement. RESULTS: = 19) gender affirming voice and communication training were included in the study. Hybrid participants had a significantly higher goal achievement rate and therapy adherence rate compared with individual participants (74% vs. 21%; 84% vs. 28%, respectively). Both training models resulted in significant elevation of SFF and reduction of TWVQ scores. Inflection range did not change significantly for either training formats. Multiple logistic regression showed that hybrid training was a positive predictor for goal achievement (odds ratio = 2.2, 95% confidence interval [0.3, 4.1]). CONCLUSIONS: Although clients in individual and hybrid gender affirming voice and communication training achieved significant pitch elevation and lower TWVQ scores, hybrid participants demonstrated significantly higher goal achievement and therapy adherence. This study suggests that hybrid training may provide a valuable support system that improves therapy success in this client population.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.258
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Speech Language and Hearing ResearchSame topicVoice and Speech DisordersFrench-language works237,207