Efficacy of Cepstral Measures in Voice Disorder Diagnosis: A Literature Review

Q4 Medicine
Mahshid Aghajanzadeh, Saeed Saeedi
{"title":"Efficacy of Cepstral Measures in Voice Disorder Diagnosis: A Literature Review","authors":"Mahshid Aghajanzadeh, Saeed Saeedi","doi":"10.18502/jmr.v16i2.9298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The acoustic analysis is one of the well-known methods for voice evaluation. In recent years, many studies have investigated the cepstral measures compared with the other former acoustic parameters. This review article evaluates the related studies in the cepstral areas to ascertain whether they are efficient in the diagnosis of dysphonia. \nMaterials and Methods: We reviewed the available research studies between 2009 and 2021 narratively in PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Science Direct databases. The searched keywords included “cepstral peak prominence”, “smoothed cepstral peak prominence”, “instrumental acoustic analysis”, “acoustic”, and “diagnosis”. The articles that investigated the power of Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) and its smoothed version (CPPS) to differentiate dysphonia versus normal voice have been included. However, the interventional studies that consider CPP and CPPS as one of their adjunct variables and studies that investigated the relationship of the cepstral measure with other parameters were not included. \nResults: Recent studies support the efficiency of CPP and CPPS to diagnose dysphonia. \nConclusion: It is reasonable for the voice care teams to use CPP and CPPS in the patients’ initial assessment and track the effects of treatment. However, according to the relatively limited number of studies in this area, more studies are required to clarify the efficacy of cepstral measures in different voice pathologies.","PeriodicalId":34281,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Modern Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jmr.v16i2.9298","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Introduction: The acoustic analysis is one of the well-known methods for voice evaluation. In recent years, many studies have investigated the cepstral measures compared with the other former acoustic parameters. This review article evaluates the related studies in the cepstral areas to ascertain whether they are efficient in the diagnosis of dysphonia. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the available research studies between 2009 and 2021 narratively in PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Science Direct databases. The searched keywords included “cepstral peak prominence”, “smoothed cepstral peak prominence”, “instrumental acoustic analysis”, “acoustic”, and “diagnosis”. The articles that investigated the power of Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) and its smoothed version (CPPS) to differentiate dysphonia versus normal voice have been included. However, the interventional studies that consider CPP and CPPS as one of their adjunct variables and studies that investigated the relationship of the cepstral measure with other parameters were not included. Results: Recent studies support the efficiency of CPP and CPPS to diagnose dysphonia. Conclusion: It is reasonable for the voice care teams to use CPP and CPPS in the patients’ initial assessment and track the effects of treatment. However, according to the relatively limited number of studies in this area, more studies are required to clarify the efficacy of cepstral measures in different voice pathologies.
倒谱测量在嗓音障碍诊断中的疗效:文献综述
声学分析是语音评价的常用方法之一。近年来,许多研究将倒谱测量与其他声学参数进行了比较。本文综述了在背侧区域的相关研究,以确定它们在诊断语音障碍方面是否有效。材料和方法:我们回顾了PubMed、Scopus、谷歌Scholar和Science Direct数据库中2009年至2021年的现有研究。搜索关键词包括“倒谱突出峰”、“平滑倒谱突出峰”、“仪器声学分析”、“声学”和“诊断”。研究倒谱峰值突出(CPP)及其平滑版本(CPPS)区分发音障碍与正常声音的能力的文章已被纳入。然而,将CPP和CPPS作为辅助变量之一的介入研究以及研究倒谱测量与其他参数关系的研究未被纳入。结果:近年来的研究支持CPP和cps诊断语音障碍的有效性。结论:语音护理团队使用CPP和CPPS对患者进行初步评估和跟踪治疗效果是合理的。然而,由于该领域的研究数量相对有限,需要更多的研究来阐明倒侧措施在不同语音病理中的疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Modern Rehabilitation
Journal of Modern Rehabilitation Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信