MedElevator
Войти в исследования Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2018
Comparison of Two Versions of the Acoustic Voice Quality Index for Quantification of Dysphonia Severity.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Kim Geun-Hyo, Lee Yeon-Woo, Bae In-Ho, Park Hee-June, Lee Byung-Joo, Kwon Soon-Bok
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The acoustic voice quality index (AVQI) is a specific acoustic indicator designed to objectively estimate dysphonia severity and measure the values of acoustic parameters based on the diagnostic category. This study compared the performance of two AVQI versions (2.02 and 3.01, v2 and v3) and PraatCPPS using a voice sample of Korean population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Voice samples for sustained vowel and connected speech were elicited from 2257 patients across 14 diagnostic categories. Auditory-perceptual (A-P) assessments of dysphonia severity were compared to acoustic parameters of severity derived from two versions of the AVQI (v2 and v3) as well as the PraatCPPS.
RESULTS: The AVQI-estimated severity (v2 and v3) and PraatCPPS severity for concatenated voice samples strongly correlated with each other and were significantly associated with A-P ratings. The AVQI (v2 and v3) and PraatCPPS showed high reliability in differentiating between pathological voice disorders.
CONCLUSION: The AVQI (v2 and v3) and PraatCPPS were strongly correlated with the A-P ratings and provided valid estimates of dysphonia severity. However, the associations of the A-P ratings with the AVQIv2 were significantly stronger than those with the AVQIv3 and PraatCPPS, suggesting that the V2 outperformed the V3 and PraatCPPS.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Voice samples for sustained vowel and connected speech were elicited from 2257 patients across 14 diagnostic categories. Auditory-perceptual (A-P) assessments of dysphonia severity were compared to acoustic parameters of severity derived from two versions of the AVQI (v2 and v3) as well as the PraatCPPS.
RESULTS: The AVQI-estimated severity (v2 and v3) and PraatCPPS severity for concatenated voice samples strongly correlated with each other and were significantly associated with A-P ratings. The AVQI (v2 and v3) and PraatCPPS showed high reliability in differentiating between pathological voice disorders.
CONCLUSION: The AVQI (v2 and v3) and PraatCPPS were strongly correlated with the A-P ratings and provided valid estimates of dysphonia severity. However, the associations of the A-P ratings with the AVQIv2 were significantly stronger than those with the AVQIv3 and PraatCPPS, suggesting that the V2 outperformed the V3 and PraatCPPS.