↓ Skip to main content

Lee Silverman Voice Treatment versus standard speech and language therapy versus control in Parkinson’s disease: a pilot randomised controlled trial (PD COMM pilot)

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 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
Lee Silverman Voice Treatment versus standard speech and language therapy versus control in Parkinson’s disease: a pilot randomised controlled trial (PD COMM pilot)
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40814-017-0222-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine M. Sackley, Christina H. Smith, Caroline E. Rick, Marian C. Brady, Natalie Ives, Smitaa Patel, Rebecca Woolley, Francis Dowling, Ramilla Patel, Helen Roberts, Sue Jowett, Keith Wheatley, Debbie Kelly, Gina Sands, Carl E. Clarke, on behalf of the PD COMM Pilot Collaborative Group

Abstract

Speech-related problems are common in Parkinson's disease (PD), but there is little evidence for the effectiveness of standard speech and language therapy (SLT) or Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT LOUD®). The PD COMM pilot was a three-arm, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial (RCT) of LSVT LOUD®, SLT and no intervention (1:1:1 ratio) to assess the feasibility and to inform the design of a full-scale RCT. Non-demented patients with idiopathic PD and speech problems and no SLT for speech problems in the past 2 years were eligible. LSVT LOUD® is a standardised regime (16 sessions over 4 weeks). SLT comprised individualised content per local practice (typically weekly sessions for 6-8 weeks). Outcomes included recruitment and retention, treatment adherence, and data completeness. Outcome data collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months included patient-reported voice and quality of life measures, resource use, and assessor-rated speech recordings. Eighty-nine patients were randomised with 90% in the therapy groups and 100% in the control group completing the trial. The response rate for Voice Handicap Index (VHI) in each arm was ≥ 90% at all time-points. VHI was highly correlated with the other speech-related outcome measures. There was a trend to improvement in VHI with LSVT LOUD® (difference at 3 months compared with control: - 12.5 points; 95% CI - 26.2, 1.2) and SLT (difference at 3 months compared with control: - 9.8 points; 95% CI - 23.2, 3.7) which needs to be confirmed in an adequately powered trial. Randomisation to a three-arm trial of speech therapy including a no intervention control is feasible and acceptable. Compliance with both interventions was good. VHI and other patient-reported outcomes were relevant measures and provided data to inform the sample size for a substantive trial. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register: ISRCTN75223808. registered 22 March 2012.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 128 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Professor 6 5%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 39 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 24 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 16%
Neuroscience 14 11%
Engineering 6 5%
Linguistics 6 5%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 40 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 06 November 2018.
All research outputs
#2,571,125
of 24,529,782 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#146
of 1,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,082
of 452,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#4
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,529,782 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 452,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.