2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2006.09.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Relationship Between Perceptual Evaluation and Objective Multiparametric Evaluation of Dysphonia Severity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
40
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
4
40
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The DSI of patients suffering from functional dysphonia was in the range of normal voices. Similar results were found in the literature [11,23] . In a group of 294 patients [23] , the median DSI values were statistically significant comparing voices with non-organic dysphonia (DSI = 2.0), vocal fold mass lesion (DSI = 1.2) and vocal fold paralysis (DSI = -0.7) with those of a control group (DSI = 4.2).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The DSI of patients suffering from functional dysphonia was in the range of normal voices. Similar results were found in the literature [11,23] . In a group of 294 patients [23] , the median DSI values were statistically significant comparing voices with non-organic dysphonia (DSI = 2.0), vocal fold mass lesion (DSI = 1.2) and vocal fold paralysis (DSI = -0.7) with those of a control group (DSI = 4.2).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…It is based on the weighted combination of important characterizing voice parameters: maximum phonation time, lowest intensity, highest frequency and jitter. The DSI is a valid instrument for distinguishing between pathological and non-pathological voices [14,23] and proved to be appropriate for clinical purposes [11-13, 16, 17] . It is also more sensitive to minimal changes [14] than perceptual measurements such as the GRBAS (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain) scale, which was the basis for the DSI construction [14] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The DSI has a nearly straight course [25] . It is a valid instrument to distinguish between pathological and nonpathological voices [24,25] and has been proven to be appropriate for clinical purposes [30][31][32][33] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…GRBAS applicability in voice area is broad and involves all kinds of voice disturbances, independent of etiology (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15) . It is a simple and fast evaluation method proposing the observation of five parameters: G (grade) -overall dysphonia grade; R -roughness, represented by hoarseness and harshness; B -breathiness; A -asthenia; S -strain.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%