Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2015
Speech Articulation of Low-Dose Oral Contraceptive Users.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Meurer Eliséa Maria, Fontoura Giana Valeria Fagundez, Corleta Helena von Eye, Capp Edison
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: In the female life cycle, hormonal fluctuations may result in impaired verbal efficiency and vocal worsening during the premenstrual phase. Oral contraceptives may interfere with vocal range. Voice, resonance, and articulation variations clarify speech content. To investigate the phonoarticulatory sounds produced by oral contraceptive users aged between 20 and 30 years.
STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study.
METHODS: Our study included four groups of women (n = 66): two groups used low-dose oral contraceptives and two groups did not use any oral contraceptives. Questionnaires and sound records were used. Acoustic analysis was performed using the Computerized Speech Laboratory program, Model 4341 (Kay Elemetrics Corp, Lincoln Park, New Jersey). The statistical analysis of the SPPS database, version 13.0, was performed by means of generalized estimating equation.
RESULTS: In the groups that did not use oral contraceptives, sustained vowel tones were more acute in the two phases and cycles of women older than 25 years (w/oOC1, 175 ± 74 to 190 ± 55 Hz; w/oOC2, 194 ± 56 to 210 ± 32 Hz). At the midfollicular phase (Fph) and midluteal phase (Lph) of the two cycles, the speed of the speech was slower in this group (w/oOC1: Fph, 5.3 ± 1.6/s and Lph, 5.4 ± 1.4/s; w/oOC2: Fph, 4.5 ± 1.7/s and Lph, 4.8 ± 1.1/s). In both groups that used oral contraceptives, there was a higher modulation frequency in the sentences when compared with nonusers (OC1, 33 ± 10 Hz; w/oOC1, 28 ± 10 Hz; OC2, 34 ± 10 Hz; w/oOC2, 27 ± 10 Hz). Vocal intensity was closer between the OC1 (62 ± 4 dB), w/oOC1 (61 ± 3 dB), and OC2 (63 ± 4 dB) groups when compared with the w/oOC2 (67 ± 6 dB) group.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated hormonal influences on speech articulation of contraceptive users and nonusers.
STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study.
METHODS: Our study included four groups of women (n = 66): two groups used low-dose oral contraceptives and two groups did not use any oral contraceptives. Questionnaires and sound records were used. Acoustic analysis was performed using the Computerized Speech Laboratory program, Model 4341 (Kay Elemetrics Corp, Lincoln Park, New Jersey). The statistical analysis of the SPPS database, version 13.0, was performed by means of generalized estimating equation.
RESULTS: In the groups that did not use oral contraceptives, sustained vowel tones were more acute in the two phases and cycles of women older than 25 years (w/oOC1, 175 ± 74 to 190 ± 55 Hz; w/oOC2, 194 ± 56 to 210 ± 32 Hz). At the midfollicular phase (Fph) and midluteal phase (Lph) of the two cycles, the speed of the speech was slower in this group (w/oOC1: Fph, 5.3 ± 1.6/s and Lph, 5.4 ± 1.4/s; w/oOC2: Fph, 4.5 ± 1.7/s and Lph, 4.8 ± 1.1/s). In both groups that used oral contraceptives, there was a higher modulation frequency in the sentences when compared with nonusers (OC1, 33 ± 10 Hz; w/oOC1, 28 ± 10 Hz; OC2, 34 ± 10 Hz; w/oOC2, 27 ± 10 Hz). Vocal intensity was closer between the OC1 (62 ± 4 dB), w/oOC1 (61 ± 3 dB), and OC2 (63 ± 4 dB) groups when compared with the w/oOC2 (67 ± 6 dB) group.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated hormonal influences on speech articulation of contraceptive users and nonusers.