Determination of Clinical Parameters Sensitive to Functional Voice Disorders Applying Boosted Decision Stumps

Abstract

Background: Various voice assessment tools, such as questionnaires and aerodynamic voice characteristics, can be used to assess vocal function of individuals. However, not much is known about the best combinations of these parameters in identification of functional dysphonia in clinical settings. Methods: This study investigated six scores from clinically commonly used questionnaires and seven acoustic parameters. 514 females and 277 males were analyzed. The subjects were divided into three groups: one healthy group (N 01 ) (49 females, 50 males) and two disordered groups with perceptually hoarse (FD 23 ) (220 females, 96 males) and perceptually not hoarse (FD 01 ) (245 females, 131 males) sounding voices. A tree stumps Adaboost approach was applied to find the subset of parameters that best separates the groups. Subsequently, it was determined if this parameter subset reflects treatment outcome for 120 female and 51 male patients by pairwise pre-and post-treatment comparisons of parameters. Results: The questionnaire ''Voice-relatedquality-of-Life'' and three objective parameters (''maximum fundamental frequency'', ''maximum Intensity'' and ''Jitter Percent'') were sufficient to separate the groups (accuracy ranging from 0.690 (FD 01 vs. FD 23 , females) to 0.961 (N 01 vs. FD 23 , females)). Our study suggests that a reduced parameter subset (4 out of 13) is sufficient to separate these three groups. All parameters reflected treatment outcome for patients with hoarse voices, Voice-related-quality-of-Life showed improvement for the not hoarse group (FD 01 ). Conclusion: Results show that single parameters are insufficient to separate voice disorders but a set of several well-chosen parameters is. These findings will help to optimize and reduce clinical assessment time.

Interdependencies between acoustic and high-speed videoendoscopy parameters

“…This may then lead to changes in the shape of the parameter distribution in comparison to healthy subjects. In summary, single parameters are not suitable for differentiating healthy from FD subjects and multi-parametric approaches are needed as suggested before [ 38 , 59 , 60 ]. However, if not FD in general but subcategories of FD (e.g.…”

Investigation of the Clinical Effectiveness and Prognostic Factors of Voice Therapy in Voice Disorders: A Pilot Study

“…Patrick Schlegel et al conducted a study to identify clinical parameters that are sensitive to functional voice disorders using boosted decision stumps. Their findings indicated that a smaller subset of parameters (specifically, 4 out of 13) was effective in distinguishing between three groups: one healthy group and two groups with voice disorders [17]. However, these studies have been limited in terms of considering the association between prognostic factors and the outcomes of speech therapy.…”