Literature DB >> 23280378

Reliability of objective voice measures of normal speaking voices.

Karen Leong1, Mary J Hawkshaw, Dimiter Dentchev, Reena Gupta, Deborah Lurie, Robert T Sataloff.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability of objective voice measures used commonly in clinical practice.
SUBJECTS: Eighteen healthy volunteers (nine males and nine females).
METHODS: Objective voice measures were performed on 18 healthy volunteers on 10 occasions under similar conditions over a 30-day period. Consistency of measures was analyzed to determine reliability.
RESULTS: Using currently accepted normative values, intraclass correlation coefficients were moderate (>0.6) for consistency over the 10 testing sessions for most acoustic measures that do not depend on intensity, measures of laryngeal efficiency, and perturbation measures of fundamental frequency (F0) for both genders. For females, cepstral peak prominence (CPP) had moderate reliability, whereas for males, the smoothed CPP was reliable. Other than F0, none of the perturbation measures are reliable for females. However, jitter, relative average perturbation, and standard deviation of F0 are reliable for males. Noise-to-harmonic ratios (NHRs) had the lowest consistency of all measures over the course of the 10 sessions.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be cautious in their use of acoustic voice measures that depend on the intensity and in their use of most perturbation measures. NHR was found to be the least reliable measure. Additionally, the reliability of CPP measure varies by gender. Understanding the degree of within-person variability on some objective voice measures and whether that variation is due to biological differences or measurement error will lead clinicians to consider the need for a more standardized testing protocol. Additional research is needed to investigate what factors within the testing protocol and/or changes to the measurement instruments may lead to more consistent test results.
Copyright © 2013 The Voice Foundation. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23280378     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2012.07.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Voice        ISSN: 0892-1997            Impact factor:   2.009


  3 in total

1.  Test-Retest Reliability of Relative Fundamental Frequency and Conventional Acoustic, Aerodynamic, and Perceptual Measures in Individuals With Healthy Voices.

Authors:  Yeonggwang Park; Cara E Stepp
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2019-06-10       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Self-perception of quality of life in patients with functional voice disorders: the effects of psychological and vocal acoustic variables.

Authors:  Mafalda Andrea; Mario Andrea; Maria Luísa Figueira
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-08-16       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Acoustic analysis of surgeons' voices to assess change in the stress response during surgical in situ simulation.

Authors:  Andrew Hall; Kosuke Kawai; Kelsey Graber; Grant Spencer; Christopher Roussin; Peter Weinstock; Mark S Volk
Journal:  BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn       Date:  2021-04-13
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.