2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.07.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Control of Fundamental Frequency in Dysphonic Patients During Phonation and Speech

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
1
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
14
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Conflicting with evidence from a prior study 24 that informed the second study hypothesis, no statistical differences were found for reflexive f o response magnitudes between the HVD and control groups (regardless of singing experience). This result is likely driven by the substantial differences in methodology between the two studies.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 89%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Conflicting with evidence from a prior study 24 that informed the second study hypothesis, no statistical differences were found for reflexive f o response magnitudes between the HVD and control groups (regardless of singing experience). This result is likely driven by the substantial differences in methodology between the two studies.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 89%
“…The present study aimed to examine a large group of speakers with HVDs (N = 62) and a hearing-, sex-, and age-matched control group (N = 62), whereas the previous study examined reflexive responses from only 10 speakers with HVDs (aged 21–64 years) and 17 controls (aged 20–30 years). The prior work reported greater reflexive f o response magnitudes in the HVD group 24 , but these may have resulted from the small sample size or age characteristics of the HVD group (reflexive response magnitudes increase with aging 36 , 37 ). The reflexive response methods may also explain the disparate results between the studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In a clinical setting, we recommend GAT for pre-post comparisons. GAT has been already used for comparing voice quality pre-post surgery (Sebova et al, 2019), pre-post voice treatment (Echternach, Raschka, et al, 2020), and pre-post vocal task (Dippold et al, 2015;Echternach et al, 2017) and how quantitative parameters vary in patient populations (Arbeiter et al, 2018;Ziethe et al, 2019). With our fully automatic glottis segmentation procedure, a straightforward workflow and an easy-to-use graphical user interface, a patient's data set can be segmented and analyzed in minutes even from untrained personnel.…”
Section: Clinical Applicationmentioning
confidence: 99%