Receiver operating characteristic analysis of acoustic and electroglottographic parameters with different sustained vowels

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridCangi, M. Emrah/0000-0001-8149-3254en_US
dc.authoridyilmaz, goksu/0000-0001-6123-8395en_US
dc.contributor.authorYılmaz, Göksu
dc.contributor.authorCangi, M. Emrah
dc.contributor.authorYelken, Kursat
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-12T21:37:27Z
dc.date.available2024-07-12T21:37:27Z
dc.date.issued2022en_US
dc.department[Belirlenecek]en_US
dc.description.abstractObjective To examine the power of the parameters obtained from different sustained vowels used in acoustic and electroglottographic (EGG) voice evaluation protocols to discriminate between dysphonic and non-dysphonic voice quality. Methods Sixty non-dysphonic participants and 30 dysphonic participants were included in the study. In addition to the time domain amplitude and frequency perturbation parameters obtained from the sustained phonation of /lambda/-/e/-/i/-/u/ vowels, several frequency-domain spectral/cepstral parameters and EGG parameters were evaluated. The classification performance of the acoustic and electroglottographic measures was quantified using analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results As a result of ROC analysis, the discriminative diagnostic performance (area under the curve, AUC) of the test for low-vowel (/lambda/-/e/) phonation was higher than values obtained from high-vowel (/i/-/u/) phonation. For /lambda/ and /e/ sustained vowels, the parameters exhibiting the highest discrimination were fundamental frequency standard deviation (f(o)/STD), cepstral peak prominence (CPP), relative average perturbation (RAP), pitch perturbation quotient (PPQ), and jitter percent (JITT). In the EGG parameters, on the other hand, average jitter and periodicity parameters obtained from front vowels (/e/-/i/) were found to have higher AUC values compared to back vowels (/lambda/-/u/). Conclusions In acoustic analyses, /lambda/ and /e/ sustained vowels give the highest diagnostic performance. In the electroglottographic evaluation, on the other hand, /e/ and /i/ vowels, when the position of the tongue is forward, have better classification performance compared to /lambda/ and /u/ vowels, when the position of the tongue is back.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/14015439.2021.1974934
dc.identifier.endpage291en_US
dc.identifier.issn1401-5439
dc.identifier.issn1651-2022
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.pmid34519593en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85114889196en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage284en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1080/14015439.2021.1974934
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12415/6785
dc.identifier.volume47en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000695983200001en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Ltden_US
dc.relation.ispartofLogopedics Phoniatrics Vocologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.snmzKY04127
dc.subjectAdsven_US
dc.subjectDysphoniaen_US
dc.subjectEggen_US
dc.subjectMdvpen_US
dc.subjectReceiver Operating Characteristicen_US
dc.subjectVowelen_US
dc.titleReceiver operating characteristic analysis of acoustic and electroglottographic parameters with different sustained vowelsen_US
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu