Screening Voice Disorders: Acoustic Voice Quality Index, Cepstral Peak Prominence, and Machine Learning

被引:0
|
作者
Yousef, Ahmed M. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Castillo-Allendes, Adrian [3 ,4 ]
Berardi, Mark L. [3 ]
Codino, Juliana [5 ]
Rubin, Adam D. [5 ]
Hunter, Eric J. [3 ]
机构
[1] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Ctr Laryngeal Surg & Voice Rehabil, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Dept Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Univ Iowa, Dept Commun Sci & Disorders, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA
[4] Michigan State Univ, Dept Commun Sci & Disorders, E Lansing, MI USA
[5] Lakeshore Profess Voice Ctr, Lakeshore Ear Nose & Throat Ctr, St Clair Shores, MI USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Voice disorders; Machine learning; Speech acoustics; Acoustic Voice Quality Index; Cepstral Peak Prominence; DYSPHONIA SEVERITY; SPEECH; VALIDATION; PITCH;
D O I
10.1159/000544852
中图分类号
R36 [病理学]; R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100104 ; 100213 ;
摘要
Introduction: The Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) and Smoothed Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPPs) have been reported to effectively support the assessment of voice quality in persons seeking voice care across many languages. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of these two measures in detecting voice disorders in American English speakers, comparing their performance to machine learning (ML) models. Methods: This retrospective study included a cohort of 187 participants: 138 patients with clinically diagnosed voice disorders and 49 vocally healthy individuals. Each participant completed two voicing tasks: sustaining [a:] vowel and producing a running speech sample, which were then concatenated. These samples were analyzed using VOXplot software for AVQI-3 (version 03.01) and CPPs. Additionally, four ML models (random forest, k-nearest neighbors, support vector machine, and decision tree) were trained for comparison. The diagnostic accuracy of the two measures and models was assessed using various evaluation metrics, including receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden Index. Results: A cutoff score of 1.54 for the AVQI-3 (with 55% sensitivity and 80% specificity) and 14.35 dB for CPPs (with 65% sensitivity and 78% specificity) were identified for detecting voice disorders. Compared to an average ML sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 55%, CPPs offered a better balance between sensitivity and specificity, outperforming AVQI-3 and nearly matching the average ML performance. Conclusions: ML shows great potential for supporting voice disorder diagnostics, especially as models become more generalizable and easier to interpret. However, current tools like AVQI-3 and CPPs remain more practical and accessible for clinical use in evaluating voice quality than commonly implemented models. CPPs, in particular, offers distinct advantages for identifying voice disorders, making it a recommended and feasible choice for clinics with limited resources.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Validation of the Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) Version 03.01 in Italian
    Fantini, Marco
    Maccarini, Andrea Ricci
    Firino, Arianna
    Gallia, Michela
    Carlino, Vittoria
    Gorris, Christel
    Bisetti, Massimo Spadola
    Crosetti, Erika
    Succo, Giovanni
    JOURNAL OF VOICE, 2023, 37 (04) : 631e1 - 631e6
  • [42] The Effectiveness of Supervised Machine Learning in Screening and Diagnosing Voice Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Al-Hussain, Ghada
    Shuweihdi, Farag
    Alali, Haitham
    Househ, Mowafa
    Abd-alrazaq, Alaa
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2022, 24 (10)
  • [43] Acoustic Voice Quality Index - AVQI for brazilian portuguese speakers: analysis of different speech material
    Englert, Marina
    Lima, Livia
    Constantini, Ana Carolina
    Latoszek, Ben Barsties, V
    Maryn, Youri
    Behlau, Mara
    CODAS, 2019, 31 (01):
  • [44] Acoustic Voice Quality Index and Acoustic Breathiness Index as two examples for strengths and weaknesses of free software in medicine
    Stappenbeck, Lydia
    Von Latoszek, Ben Barsties
    Janotte, Ben
    Lehnert, Bernhard
    BIOMEDICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING AND CONTROL, 2020, 59
  • [45] Test-retest variability and internal consistency of the Acoustic Voice Quality Index
    Barsties, B.
    Maryn, Y.
    HNO, 2013, 61 (05) : 399 - 403
  • [46] Comparing the Voice Handicap Index Scores in Groups With Structural and Functional Voice Disorders
    Jalalian, Marzie
    Saleh, Majid
    Zarei, Naser
    Shekari, Ehsan
    Afshari, Samad
    ARCHIVES OF REHABILITATION, 2019, 20 (04): : 376 - 382
  • [47] Outcomes Measurement in Voice Disorders: Application of an Acoustic Index of Dysphonia Severity
    Awan, Shaheen N.
    Roy, Nelson
    JOURNAL OF SPEECH LANGUAGE AND HEARING RESEARCH, 2009, 52 (02): : 482 - 499
  • [48] Validation of Acoustic Voice Quality Index Version 3.01 and Acoustic Breathiness Index in Korean Population
    Kim, Geun-Hyo
    von Latoszek, Ben Barsties
    Lee, Yeon-Woo
    JOURNAL OF VOICE, 2021, 35 (04) : 660.e9 - 660.e18
  • [49] A Survey on Machine Learning Approaches for Automatic Detection of Voice Disorders
    Hegde, Sarika
    Shetty, Surendra
    Rai, Smitha
    Dodderi, Thejaswi
    JOURNAL OF VOICE, 2019, 33 (06) : 947.e11 - 947.e33
  • [50] Fundamental Frequency and Intensity Effects on Cepstral Measures in Vowels from Connected Speech of Speakers with Voice Disorders
    Sampaio, Marilia Carvalho
    Bohlender, Joerg Edgar
    Brockmann-Bauser, Meike
    JOURNAL OF VOICE, 2021, 35 (03) : 422 - 431