Literature DB >> 22218847

Voicing quantification is more relevant than period perturbation in substitution voices: an advanced acoustical study.

P H Dejonckere1, M B J Moerman, J P Martens, J Schoentgen, C Manfredi.   

Abstract

Quality of substitution voicing-i.e., phonation with a voice that is not generated by the vibration of two vocal folds-cannot be adequately evaluated with routinely used software for acoustic voice analysis that is aimed at 'common' dysphonias and nearly periodic voice signals. The AMPEX analysis program (Van Immerseel and Martens) has been shown previously to be able to detect periodicity in irregular signals with background noise, and to be suited for running speech. The validity of this analysis program is first tested using realistic synthesized voice signals with known levels of cycle-to-cycle perturbations and additive noise. Second, exhaustive acoustic analysis is performed of the voices of 116 patients surgically treated for advanced laryngeal cancer and recorded in seven European academic centers. All of them read out a short phonetically balanced passage. Patients were divided into six groups according to the oscillating structures they used to phonate. Results show that features related to quantification of voicing enable a distinction between the different groups, while the features reporting F(0)-instability fail to do so. Acoustic evaluation of voice quality in substitution voices thus best relies upon voicing quantification.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22218847      PMCID: PMC3311984          DOI: 10.1007/s00405-011-1900-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  10 in total

1.  A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. Guideline elaborated by the Committee on Phoniatrics of the European Laryngological Society (ELS).

Authors:  P H Dejonckere; P Bradley; P Clemente; G Cornut; L Crevier-Buchman; G Friedrich; P Van De Heyning; M Remacle; V Woisard
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Acoustic voice analysis by means of the hoarseness diagram.

Authors:  M Fröhlich; D Michaelis; H W Strube; E Kruse
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  The INFVo perceptual rating scale for substitution voicing: development and reliability.

Authors:  Mieke Moerman; Jean-Pierre Martens; Lise Crevier-Buchman; Else de Haan; Stephanie Grand; Christophe Tessier; Virginie Woisard; Philippe Dejonckere
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2006-01-11       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Spectral, cepstral, and multivariate exploration of tracheoesophageal voice quality in continuous speech and sustained vowels.

Authors:  Youri Maryn; Catherine Dick; Caroline Vandenbruaene; Tom Vauterin; Tinne Jacobs
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Spectrographic differences between tracheal-esophageal and esophageal voice.

Authors:  G Bertino; A Bellomo; C Miani; F Ferrero; A Staffieri
Journal:  Folia Phoniatr Logop       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 0.849

6.  Validity of jitter measures in non-quasi-periodic voices. Part II: the effect of noise.

Authors:  Claudia Manfredi; Andrea Giordano; Jean Schoentgen; Samia Fraj; Leonardo Bocchi; Philippe Dejonckere
Journal:  Logoped Phoniatr Vocol       Date:  2011-05-24       Impact factor: 1.487

7.  [Contribution and limits of acoustic analysis of the voice and alaryngeal speech with a computerized system].

Authors:  L Crevier-Buchman; O Laccourreye; J F Papon; M C Monfrais-Pfauwadel; D Brasnu
Journal:  Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac       Date:  1996

8.  Assessment of irregular voices after total and laser surgical partial laryngectomy.

Authors:  Arno Olthoff; Sibylle Mrugalla; Rainer Laskawi; Matthias Fröhlich; Ingo Stuermer; Eberhard Kruse; Petra Ambrosch; Wolfgang Steiner
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2003-09

9.  Objective evaluation of the quality of substitution voices.

Authors:  Mieke Moerman; Glenn Pieters; Jean-Pierre Martens; Marie-Jeanne Van der Borgt; Phillippe Dejonckere
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 2.503

10.  Acoustical analysis and perceptual evaluation of tracheoesophageal prosthetic voice.

Authors:  C J van As; F J Hilgers; I M Verdonck-de Leeuw; F Koopmans-van Beinum
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.009

  10 in total
  4 in total

Review 1.  Functional outcomes after supracricoid laryngectomy: what do we not know and what do we need to know?

Authors:  Antonio Schindler; Nicole Pizzorni; Francesco Mozzanica; Marco Fantini; Daniela Ginocchio; Andy Bertolin; Erika Crosetti; Giovanni Succo
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-11-06       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Lightweight Deep Learning Model for Assessment of Substitution Voicing and Speech after Laryngeal Carcinoma Surgery.

Authors:  Rytis Maskeliūnas; Audrius Kulikajevas; Robertas Damaševičius; Kipras Pribuišis; Nora Ulozaitė-Stanienė; Virgilijus Uloza
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 6.575

Review 3.  Objective and subjective voice outcomes after total laryngectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Klaske E van Sluis; Lisette van der Molen; Rob J J H van Son; Frans J M Hilgers; Patrick A Bhairosing; Michiel W M van den Brekel
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 4.  Voice quality after transoral CO2 laser microsurgery (TOLMS): systematic review of literature.

Authors:  Andrea Colizza; Massimo Ralli; Chiara D'Elia; Antonio Greco; Marco de Vincentiis
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-05-03       Impact factor: 3.236

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.