ArticleJournal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation2023
An Assessment of Different Praat Versions for Acoustic Measures Analyzed Automatically by VoiceEvalU8 and Manually by Two Raters.
Article in Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- I speak Tele outlines the design of a digitized dysarthria assessment.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Normative Values of Client-Reported Outcome Measures and Self-Ratings of Six Voice Parameters via the VoiceEvalU8 App.Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2024Article
- Accuracy Analysis of the Multiparametric Acoustic Voice Indices, the VWI, AVQI, ABI, and DSI Measures, in Differentiating between Normal and Dysphonic Voices.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Normative Values of Cepstral Peak Prominence Measures in Typical Speakers by Sex, Speech Stimuli, and Software Type Across the Life Span.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2023Article
- Reliability of Universal-Platform-BasedJournal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Addressing disparities in speech-language pathology and laryngology services with telehealth.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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe purpose of the study was to assess acoustic measures of fundamental frequency (f
methodsNineteen vocally healthy females used VoiceEvalU8 to record three 5-s sustained /a/ trials, the all voiced phrase "we were away a year ago," and a 15-s speech sample twice a day for five consecutive days. Two raters manually completed acoustic analysis using different versions of Praat and compared that analysis to measures automatically generated through a version of Praat used by VoiceEvalU8. One-way analyses of variance were run for all acoustic measures with post-hoc testing by the Bonferroni method. For acoustic measures that demonstrated significant differences, intraclass correlation coefficients were conducted.
resultsResults showed no significant differences across automatic and manual analysis for different versions of Praat for all acoustic measures during /a/, for f
conclusionsAcoustic measures analyzed through sustained /a/ and some of the acoustic measures during the phrase and speech were not different across multiple versions of Praat. Automatic analysis by VoiceEvalU8 produced similar mean values as compared to manual analysis by two raters. Even though SD of f
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.