Objective: To analyze global scientific production related to voice therapy in adults with behavioral dysphonia.

Methods: A bibliometric review of the literature was conducted. The guiding research question was: “What are the global trends in scientific production on voice therapy for adults with behavioral voice disorders?” Electronic searches were performed in MEDLINE/PubMed, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, complemented by manual searches in gray literature sources (ProQuest, MedRxiv, and the first 100 results in Google Scholar), as well as citation and reference mapping of the selected studies. Studies involving adults aged 18–64 years with behavioral voice disorders who underwent voice therapy were included. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Term co-occurrence analysis was conducted using VOSviewer, applying the full counting method and a minimum occurrence threshold for inclusion. Keywords and descriptors were grouped into clusters to identify thematic associations and temporal trends. This review followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, and its protocol was prospectively registered in the Open Science Framework.

Results: A total of 17,464 records were identified, and after the application of eligibility criteria, 447 eligible articles were selected. Terminological analysis revealed the predominance of the term “voice disorders” over “dysphonia”, suggesting a preference for broader descriptors encompassing diverse vocal conditions beyond alterations in voice quality. The temporal distribution showed a progressive increase in “voice disorders.” Regarding etiological descriptors, the most frequent terms for laryngeal lesions were “vocal fold nodules” and “vocal fold cysts;” and for disorder classification, “functional” and “muscle tension dysphonia.” The rising use of “muscle tension dysphonia” reflects conceptual refinement and increased diagnostic specificity. Concerning therapy, the most frequent terms were “voice therapy;” “rehabilitation;” and “treatment.” The less frequent use of “voice training” aligns with current clinical practice, where it refers primarily to vocal enhancement in healthy individuals.

Conclusion: Scientific production on behavioral voice disorders demonstrates evolving terminology and conceptual clarity, with a trend toward broader descriptors while retaining specific terms essential for diagnostic accuracy. These nomenclature shifts—particularly in etiological and therapeutic contexts—reflect advancements in clinical knowledge and scientific understanding of behavioral dysphonia.