Diagnostic Accuracy of Dysphonia Classification of <scp>DSI</scp> and <scp>AVQI</scp>

Latoszek, Ben Barsties v.; Ulozaitė-Stanienė, Nora; Petrauskas, Tadas; Uloza, Virgilijus; Maryn, Youri

doi:10.1002/lary.27350

Cited by 29 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…8 In laryngology, acoustic measurements are especially used as indicators of the efficiency of speech therapy, medical or surgical treatments in many conditions (ie, nodules, 9 polyps, 10 laryngopharyngeal reflux, 11 and or aging voice). 12 Furthermore, some acoustic measures are included in the calculation of many multidimensional scores, such as the dysphonia severity index 13 or the acoustic voice quality index, 14 that are useful in some public health systems to obtain reimbursement of speech therapy. 15 In two recent systematic reviews focusing on the evolution of acoustic measurements throughout treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and idiopathic Parkinson's disease (IPD), it was reported that the method used for the measurement of acoustic parameters (ie, vowel types; number of samples; and selection of the time interval over which the acoustic parameters are measured) significantly varies between studies, which is associated with controversial results and unclear conclusions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the Acoustic Measurements Reliable in the Assessment of Voice Quality? A Methodological Prospective Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the Acoustic Measurements Reliable in the Assessment of Voice Quality? A Methodological Prospective Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…On the other hand, continuous speech is more representative of daily speech and, therefore, can be considered to be more 'ecologically valid' [6]. Several studies in the last decade already demonstrated the robust diagnostic accuracy of AVQI [5,[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24], its consistent and high concurrent validity [5,[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]19,[21][22][23][24][25] and its high sensitivity to voice changes across voice therapy [8,12,16,18,21]. Furthermore, studies validating the use of AVQI in different languages showed diagnostic accuracy according to inter-language phonetic differences [9][10][11][12]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Case of Specificity: How Does the Acoustic Voice Quality Index Perform in Normophonic Subjects?

Batthyany

Maryn

Trauwaen³

et al. 2019

Applied Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The acoustic voice quality index (AVQI) is a multiparametric tool based on six acoustic measurements to quantify overall voice quality in an objective manner, with the smoothed version of the cepstral peak prominence (CPPS) as its main contributor. In the last decade, many studies demonstrated its robust diagnostic accuracy and high sensitivity to voice changes across voice therapy in different languages. The aim of the present study was to provide information regarding AVQI’s and CPPS’s performance in normophonic non-treatment-seeking subjects, since these data are still scarce; concatenated voice samples, consisting of sustained vowel phonation and continuous speech, from 123 subjects (72 females, 51 males; between 20 and 60 years old) without vocally relevant complaints were evaluated by three raters and run in AVQI v.02.06. According to this auditory-perceptual evaluation, two cohorts were set up (normophonia versus slight perceived dysphonia). First, gender effects were investigated. Secondly, between-cohort differences in AVQI and CPPS were investigated. Thirdly, with the number of judges giving G = 1 to partition three sub-levels of slight hoarseness as an independent factor, differences in AVQI and CPPS across these sub-levels were investigated; for AVQI, no significant gender effect was found, whereas, for CPPS, significant trends were observed. For both AVQI and CPPS, no significant differences were found between normophonic and slightly dysphonic subjects. For AVQI, however, this difference did approach significance; these findings emphasize the need for a normative study with a greater sample size and subsequently greater statistical power to detect possible significant effects and differences.

show abstract

“…Findings from prior research indicated no significant correlations between the subjects’ age, sex, AVQI, and ABI measurements [ 31 , 36 ]. However, DSI values were found to be unrelated to sex but showed a slight correlation with age [ 43 ]. Consequently, in the current study, the control and patient groups were deemed appropriate for analyzing the investigated MAVI data, even though these groups were not matched in terms of sex and age.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on auditory-perceptual judgment, the research team concluded that the AVQI appears to be useful in defining variations in vocal quality state and distinguishing between normal and dysphonic voices [ 21 ]. However, the consequent study yielded that both these MAVIs can also differentiate between vocally healthy and voice-disordered subjects in comparison with the dysphonia classification based on the diagnosis of laryngeal disorder, thus enabling the quantification of abnormality [ 43 ]. In 2023, Penido et al evaluated the AVQI, ABI, and DSI for speech–language pathologist decision-making in the assessment of teachers’ voice complications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy Analysis of the Multiparametric Acoustic Voice Indices, the VWI, AVQI, ABI, and DSI Measures, in Differentiating between Normal and Dysphonic Voices

Uloza,

Pribuišis,

Ulozaite-Staniene

et al. 2023

JCM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aimed to investigate and compare the accuracy and robustness of the multiparametric acoustic voice indices (MAVIs), namely the Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI), Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI), Acoustic Breathiness Index (ABI), and Voice Wellness Index (VWI) measures in differentiating normal and dysphonic voices. The study group consisted of 129 adult individuals including 49 with normal voices and 80 patients with pathological voices. The diagnostic accuracy of the investigated MAVI in differentiating between normal and pathological voices was assessed using receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Moderate to strong positive linear correlations were observed between different MAVIs. The ROC statistical analysis revealed that all used measurements manifested in a high level of accuracy (area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80 and greater) and an acceptable level of sensitivity and specificity in discriminating between normal and pathological voices. However, with AUC 0.99, the VWI demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy. The highest Youden index equaled 0.93, revealing that a VWI cut-off of 4.45 corresponds with highly acceptable sensitivity (97.50%) and specificity (95.92%). In conclusion, the VWI was found to be beneficial in describing differences in voice quality status and discriminating between normal and dysphonic voices based on clinical diagnosis, i.e., dysphonia type, implying the VWI’s reliable voice screening potential.

show abstract

Diagnostic Accuracy of Dysphonia Classification of DSI and AVQI

Abstract: 2c. Laryngoscope, 2018.

Cited by 29 publications

References 49 publications

Are the Acoustic Measurements Reliable in the Assessment of Voice Quality? A Methodological Prospective Study

Are the Acoustic Measurements Reliable in the Assessment of Voice Quality? A Methodological Prospective Study

A Case of Specificity: How Does the Acoustic Voice Quality Index Perform in Normophonic Subjects?

Accuracy Analysis of the Multiparametric Acoustic Voice Indices, the VWI, AVQI, ABI, and DSI Measures, in Differentiating between Normal and Dysphonic Voices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About