2024
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2022.01.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Comparison of Healthy and Disordered Voices Using Multi-Dimensional Voice Program, Praat, and TF32

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…21 In dysphonic voices, the reliability results of these four acoustic measures between Praat and TF32 were mostly comparable with those of vocally healthy voices (fundamental frequency: r = 0.911, jitter: r = 0.959, shimmer: r = 0.642, and harmonics-to-noise ratio/signal-to-noise ratio: r = 0.962; all p-values < 0.001). 21 The correlation coefficients with its highly significant levels are sufficiently reliable for all four acoustic parameters in various voice severity levels. Therefore, clinical trials that used Praat or TF32/CSpeech for treatment evaluation of the four different acoustic measures can be considered for the present meta-analysis.…”
Section: Study Selectionmentioning
confidence: 60%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…21 In dysphonic voices, the reliability results of these four acoustic measures between Praat and TF32 were mostly comparable with those of vocally healthy voices (fundamental frequency: r = 0.911, jitter: r = 0.959, shimmer: r = 0.642, and harmonics-to-noise ratio/signal-to-noise ratio: r = 0.962; all p-values < 0.001). 21 The correlation coefficients with its highly significant levels are sufficiently reliable for all four acoustic parameters in various voice severity levels. Therefore, clinical trials that used Praat or TF32/CSpeech for treatment evaluation of the four different acoustic measures can be considered for the present meta-analysis.…”
Section: Study Selectionmentioning
confidence: 60%
“…These differences of data processing include bias because acoustic measures will vary based on the various acoustic software platforms utilized, such as Multi Dimensional Voice Program, Praat, TF32, Dr. Speech, and WPCVox 21,38,39 . Data differences among the software platforms are due to the fact that each platform uses different algorithms for specific acoustic measurements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…10,12 Also, one must keep in mind that the equipment and its features used for audio-recordings are important and can directly alter the results of the measured vocal outcomes. 25,26 Thus, using different software and hardware in the studies may have caused inconsistencies between the study results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The objective assessment of the voice has received considerable attention, because of its comparatively low cost, easy application, and quantitative output. The various programs available on the market, as Multi-Dimensional Voice Program, provide the possibility to perform a vocal-writing study on the recording made and this allows the extrapolation of acoustic parameters 4 . The purpose of our study was to investigate through acoustic voice analysis the parameters, according to sex, of older patients who came to observation for dysphonia and subsequent diagnosis of presbyphonia.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%