“…Further investigations about AVQI revealed consistent and acceptable diagnostic precision, 7,28-38 consistent and high concurrent validity, 7,28-39 robust interlanguage phonetic differences, [29][30][31][32][33][34][37][38][39] testretest variability about 0.54 for the second AVQI version, 40 independence of the influencing factors of age and gender, 25 and high sensitivity to voice changes across voice therapy. 28,32,41 The comparison and correlation between laryngeal imaging and other clinical methods are important to interpret the results of the techniques and increase their clinical relevance. [42][43][44] To what extent the comparison between a sign (e.g., abnormal value of the DSI and AVQI) and a voice pathology (e.g., abnormal results of laryngeal imaging, history, and complaints) addressed the research question might be valuable, for example, for a screening process that enables a quantification of abnormality and then pre-to posttreatment change.…”