Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Voice ; 37(5): 663-681, 2023 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34116889

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Linear acoustic indices are significantly influenced by speaking voice intensity. The main aim of this work was to compare acoustic measures based on linear and nonlinear models in different speaking voice intensity levels and to analyze the reliability of those measures in different intensity levels in subjects with voice disorders. METHODS: 435 samples from subjects (314 women, 121 men with a mean age of 41.07 ± 13.73) diagnosed with various voice disorders were used. In total, 17 acoustic measures were derived from the vowel /ɛ/ sustained at three intensity levels (soft, comfortable, and loud). Five were linear (standard deviation of the fundamental frequency (f0), jitter, shimmer, harmonics-to-noise ratio (HNR) and smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS)), and twelve were nonlinear measures, namely correlation dimension (D2), correlation entropy (H2), first minimum of the mutual information function (FMMI), relative entropy (ENTR-R), largest Lyapunov exponent (Lyap), determinism (DET), transitivity, mean diagonal line length (Lmed), Shannon entropy (ENTR-S), mean length of vertical structures, also known as trapping time (TT), laminarity (LAM) and recurrence period density entropy (RPDE). Differences between speaking voice intensity levels were assessed by Friedman's test and Nemenyi as posthoc test. Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to investigate if each acoustic measure remains in agreement (reliability) between different voice intensity levels. RESULTS: There were significant differences in all acoustic measures about vocal intensity level (P < 0.001). Intraclass correlation coefficient was very good for HNR (>0.61) and good for Lyap, DET, ENTR-S, Lmed, RPDE, and TT (0.41-0.60). CONCLUSIONS: All acoustic measures varied as a function of vocal intensity in voice disordered adults, while this relation was different for linear and nonlinear measures. Only the measures HNR, Lyap, DET, ENTR-S, Lmed, RPDE and TT had an acceptable reliability between different voice intensity levels. Therefore, patient`s voice SPL should be controlled or indicated during acoustic vocal assessment.


Assuntos
Fonação , Distúrbios da Voz , Adulto , Masculino , Humanos , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Qualidade da Voz , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Acústica da Fala , Medida da Produção da Fala/métodos , Distúrbios da Voz/diagnóstico , Acústica
2.
J Voice ; 35(3): 422-431, 2021 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31883852

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Cepstral peak prominence (CPP) and smoothed CPP (CPPS) have been described as reliable parameters to detect overall dysphonia in standardized connected speech samples. Recent studies indicate that vocal intensity (sound pressure level, SPL) and fundamental frequency (fo) changes may influence cepstral measurement results in healthy speakers. The main aim of the present work was to investigate the effects of prosody related SPL and fo variations on cepstral measures in speech of adults with voice disorders. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. METHODS: Recordings of CAPE-V sentences from 27 voice disordered Brazilian Portuguese speakers (19 women, eight men) with a mean age of 45 years (SD = 13) were investigated. Five /a/ vowels were manually extracted from stressed syllables in different positions. Voice fo (Hz), SPL (dBA), CPP (dB), and CPPS (dB) were computed using PRAAT. Statistical analysis included Linear Mixed Models with ANCOVA and Bonferroni post hoc tests. RESULTS: Voice SPL as single factor and combined with fo had a highly significant effect (P ≤ 0.001), while fo alone had no significant impact on both CPP and CPPS (P ≥ 0.77). Voice fo, SPL, CPP, and CPPS of the first vowel were all significantly lower than of the last vowel (P ≤ 0.03). CONCLUSION: In vowel samples from connected speech of adults with voice disorders, we observed better CPP and CPPS in higher voice SPL alone and combined with higher fo. Further, the vowel position influenced the present results. A larger clinical study should confirm how prosody related SPL and fo and vowel position effects could be controlled for in connected speech samples.


Assuntos
Disfonia , Fala , Adulto , Brasil , Estudos Transversais , Disfonia/diagnóstico , Disfonia/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Acústica da Fala , Medida da Produção da Fala , Qualidade da Voz
3.
J Speech Lang Hear Res ; 63(5): 1326-1339, 2020 05 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32348195

RESUMO

Purpose Smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS) and harmonics-to-noise ratio (HNR) are acoustic measures related to the periodicity, harmonicity, and noise components of an acoustic signal. To date, there is little evidence about the advantages of CPPS over HNR in voice diagnostics. Recent studies indicate that voice fundamental frequency (F0) and intensity (sound pressure level [SPL]), sample duration (DUR), vowel context (speech vs. sustained phonation), and syllable stress (SS) may influence CPPS and HNR results. The scope of this work was to investigate the effects of voice F0 and SPL, DUR, SS, and token on CPPS and HNR in dysphonic voices. Method In this retrospective study, 27 Brazilian Portuguese speakers with voice disorders were investigated. Recordings of sustained vowels (SVs) /a:/ and manually extracted vowels (EVs) /a/ from Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice sentences were acoustically analyzed with the Praat program. Results There was a highly significant effect of F0, SPL, and DUR on both CPPS and HNR (p < .001), whereas SS and vowel context significantly affected CPPS only (p < .05). Higher SPL, F0, and lower DUR were related to higher CPPS and HNR. SVs moderately-to-highly correlated with EVs for CPPS, whereas HNR had few and moderate correlations. In addition, CPPS and HNR highly correlated in SVs and seven EVs (p < .05). Conclusion Speaking prosodic variations of F0, SPL, and DUR influenced both CPPS and HNR measures and led to acoustic differences between sustained and excised vowels, especially in CPPS. Vowel context, prosodic factors, and token type should be controlled for in clinical acoustic voice assessment.


Assuntos
Acústica da Fala , Qualidade da Voz , Brasil , Humanos , Fonação , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medida da Produção da Fala
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA