European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2022
Relationship of cepstral analysis with voice self-assessments in dysphonic and normal speakers.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Saeedi Saeed, Aghajanzadeh Mahshid, Khoddami Seyyedeh Maryam, Dabirmoghaddam Payman, Jalaie Shohreh
Аннотация
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.
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.