ArticleThe Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology2018
Predicting Intelligibility Deficit in Dysphonic Speech with Cepstral Peak Prominence.
Article in The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of a speaker's voice quality on auditory perception and cognition: a behavioral and subjective approach.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Application of a Landmark-Based Method for Acoustic Analysis of Dysphonic Speech.Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2020Article
- An exploratory model of speech intelligibility for healthy aging based on phonatory and articulatory measures.Journal of communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to examine the potential of cepstral peak prominence (CPP) for predicting the intelligibility deficit in dysphonic speech.
methodsSentences from Hearing-in-Noise Test were recorded from 18 speakers with dysphonia and 18 speakers with normal voice. These samples were presented to 60 adults with normal hearing in quiet and noise at signal to noise ratio of +0 dB. Intelligibility was measured by orthographic transcription. Cepstral peak prominence was measured for all samples. Correlation between CPP and intelligibility score was examined.
resultsIntelligibility was significantly lower in dysphonic speech than normal speech in the presence of background noise. The correlation between CPP and intelligibility score was moderate when the intelligibility scores were averaged per speaker.
conclusionsCepstral peak prominence only moderately predicts intelligibility deficit in dysphonic speech. Accordingly, CPP alone is not sufficient for describing the deficit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.