Literature DB >> 36229669

Relationship of cepstral analysis with voice self-assessments in dysphonic and normal speakers.

Saeed Saeedi1, Mahshid Aghajanzadeh2, Seyyedeh Maryam Khoddami1, Payman Dabirmoghaddam3, Shohreh Jalaie4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the relationship of cepstral analysis (Cepstral Peak Prominence [CPP] and Cepstral Peak Prominence-Smoothed [CPPS]) with voice self-assessments (The Persian version of vocal tract discomfort [VTDp] scale and non-standard hoarseness self-assessment [NHS] questionnaire).
METHODS: 223 participants (159 with and 64 without dysphonia) were asked to utter the vocal tasks namely vowels /a/ and /e/, six standard sentences, and a non-standard connected speech sample. CPP and CPPS were calculated in these three vocal tasks using the "Praat" software. The participants also asked to complete the VTDp scale and the NHS questionnaire.
RESULTS: The means of frequency and severity the VTDp and the means of NHS were statistically different between the dysphonic and normal voice groups (P < 0.05), except for tickling (P > 0.05). There was a very low significant correlation between cepstral analysis with aching and in the dysphonic group (P < 0.05). However, a very low to low significant correlation between cepstral analysis with burning, tight, aching, tickling, sore, and both frequency and severity subscales scores of the VTDp in the normal voice group (P < 0.05). Moreover, the means of the cepstral analysis did not differ significantly between all scores of the NHS in the dysphonic the normal voice groups (P > 0.05), except for 1 with 3, 4, and 5 in the dysphonic group (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The cepstral analysis can provide some information about the status of vocal tract and person's perception of his/her own voice quality.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cepstral analysis; Dysphonia; Instrumental acoustic voice analysis; Self-assessment; Vocal tract discomfort

Year:  2022        PMID: 36229669     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-022-07690-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   3.236


  34 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 discrimination of pathological voice: sustained vowels versus continuous speech.

Authors:  V Parsa; D G Jamieson
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  Review: occupational risks for voice problems.

Authors:  K Verdolini; L O Ramig
Journal:  Logoped Phoniatr Vocol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.487

4.  Efficiency and Cutoff Values of Self-Assessment Instruments on the Impact of a Voice Problem.

Authors:  Mara Behlau; Glaucya Madazio; Felipe Moreti; Gisele Oliveira; Luciana de Moraes Alves Dos Santos; Bruna Rabelo Paulinelli; Euro de Barros Couto Junior
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2015-07-11       Impact factor: 2.009

5.  Establishment of a normative database for the Voice-Related Quality of Life (V-RQOL) measure.

Authors:  Robbi A Kupfer; Emily M Hogikyan; Norman D Hogikyan
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 2.009

6.  A Cepstral Analysis of Normal and Pathologic Voice Qualities in Iranian Adults: A Comparative Study.

Authors:  Arezoo Hasanvand; Abolfazl Salehi; Mona Ebrahimipour
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 2.009

7.  Vocal tract discomfort symptoms in patients with different voice disorders.

Authors:  Leonardo Wanderley Lopes; Gyllyane Furtado Cabral; Anna Alice Figueiredo de Almeida
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 2.009

Review 8.  Measuring quality of life in dysphonic patients: a systematic review of content development in patient-reported outcomes measures.

Authors:  Ryan C Branski; Sabrina Cukier-Blaj; Andrea Pusic; Stefan J Cano; Anne Klassen; David Mener; Snehal Patel; Dennis H Kraus
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2009-01-29       Impact factor: 2.009

9.  Treatment responsiveness of the Singing Voice Handicap Index.

Authors:  Seth M Cohen; David L Witsell; Leda Scearce; Gina Vess; Caroline Banka
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.325

Review 10.  Evidence-based clinical voice assessment: a systematic review.

Authors:  Nelson Roy; Julie Barkmeier-Kraemer; Tanya Eadie; M Preeti Sivasankar; Daryush Mehta; Diane Paul; Robert Hillman
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2012-11-26       Impact factor: 2.408

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.