Speech therapy for transgender women: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We systematically reviewed the literature and performed a meta-analysis on the effects of speech therapy and phonosurgery, for transgender women, in relation to the fundamental frequency gain of the voice, regarding the type of vocal sample collected, and we compared the effectiveness of the treatments. In addition, the study design, year, country, types of techniques used, total therapy time, and vocal assessment protocols were analyzed. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Lilacs, and SciELO databases for observational studies and clinical trials, published in English, Portuguese, or Spanish, between January 2010 and January 2023. The selection of studies was carried out according to Prisma 2020. The quality of selected studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Of 493 studies, 31 were deemed potentially eligible and retrieved for full-text review and 16 were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Six studies performed speech therapy and ten studies phonosurgery. The speech therapy time did not influence the post-treatment gain in voice fundamental frequency (p = 0.6254). The type of sample collected significantly influenced the post-treatment voice frequency gain (p < 0.01). When the vocal sample was collected through vowel (p < 0.01) and reading (p < 0.01), the gain was significantly more heterogeneous between the different types of treatment. Phonosurgery is significantly more effective in terms of fundamental frequency gain compared to speech therapy alone, regardless of the type of sample collected (p < 0.01). The average gain of fundamental frequency after speech therapy, in the /a/ vowel sample, was 27 Hz, 39.05 Hz in reading, and 25.42 Hz in spontaneous speech. In phonosurgery, there was a gain of 71.68 Hz for the vowel /a/, 41.07 Hz in reading, and 39.09 Hz in spontaneous speech. The study with the highest gain (110 Hz) collected vowels, and the study with the lowest gain (15 Hz), spontaneous speech. The major of the included studies received a score between 4 and 8 on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. CONCLUSION: The type of vocal sample collected influences the gain result of the fundamental frequency after treatment. Speech therapy and phonosurgery increased the fundamental frequency and improved female voice perception and vocal satisfaction. However, phonosurgery yielded a greater fundamental frequency gain in the different samples collected. The study protocol was registered at Prospero (CRD42017078446).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.061 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".