ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2026
Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System: Reliability and Dosage of Common Ingredients in Standard-of-Care Therapy for Vocal Hyperfunction.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) is a theory-driven framework for identifying the active ingredients of rehabilitation treatments and was used to create standard labels in voice therapy (RTSS-Voice). The RTSS and RTSS-Voice have high validity, but reliability has not been tested. This study evaluated if RTSS-Voice ingredients can be reliably coded in standard-of-care voice therapy videos and used to identify commonalities and differences in ingredient dosage across five expert voice clinicians from different institutions.
methodFive speech-language pathologists from different institutions videotaped one voice therapy session for 36 patients with vocal hyperfunction. Two trained graduate students coded sessions using four RTSS-Voice ingredients: (a) opportunities to practice voicing, (b) feedback, (c) volition ingredients, and (d) vocal hygiene information. Twelve sessions were double coded for interrater reliability.
resultsPractice voicing codes achieved strong to almost perfect reliability (κs: .80-.95), while informational codes achieved moderate-to-strong reliability (κs: .61-.87). All clinicians spent more time on volition ingredients (14-34 min/52.4%-65.7% of the session) compared to practice voicing (3-8 min/6.3%-23.3% of the session) and feedback (3-11 min/10.8%-19.1% of the session). For practice voicing, clinicians incorporated modified airflow and resonance into over 70% of their practice and spent more time in nonspeech and structured speech compared to spontaneous speech practice. Clinicians differed in delivering volitional information and feedback directly versus indirectly.
conclusionsMultiple RTSS-Voice ingredients were reliable across raters, indicating that, with appropriate training, these are readily observable clinician actions that can aid in the study of dosage in voice therapy. The RTSS and RTSS-Voice also identified commonalities and differences in ingredient usage across multiple expert clinicians. Future work could use the RTSS and RTSS-Voice to investigate relationships between variations in therapy ingredients and individual patient outcomes. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.32785938.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.