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

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Ahmed M Yousef, Adrián Castillo-Allendes, Mark L Berardi, Juliana Codino, Adam D Rubin, Eric J Hunter
{"title":"Screening Voice Disorders: Acoustic Voice Quality Index, Cepstral Peak Prominence, and Machine Learning.","authors":"Ahmed M Yousef, Adrián Castillo-Allendes, Mark L Berardi, Juliana Codino, Adam D Rubin, Eric J Hunter","doi":"10.1159/000544852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) and smoothed Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPPs) have been reported to effectively support the assessing of voice quality in persons seeking voice care across many languages. This study aims 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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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 (RF), k-Nearest Neighbors (k-NN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Decision Tree (DT)) 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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 the best balance between sensitivity and specificity, outperforming AVQI-3 and nearly matching the average ML performance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Machine learning 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":12114,"journal":{"name":"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica","volume":" ","pages":"1-28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000544852","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) and smoothed Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPPs) have been reported to effectively support the assessing of voice quality in persons seeking voice care across many languages. This study aims 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 (RF), k-Nearest Neighbors (k-NN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Decision Tree (DT)) 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 the best balance between sensitivity and specificity, outperforming AVQI-3 and nearly matching the average ML performance.

Conclusions: Machine learning 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.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica
Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Published since 1947, ''Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica'' provides a forum for international research on the anatomy, physiology, and pathology of structures of the speech, language, and hearing mechanisms. Original papers published in this journal report new findings on basic function, assessment, management, and test development in communication sciences and disorders, as well as experiments designed to test specific theories of speech, language, and hearing function. Review papers of high quality are also welcomed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信