ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2023
Are smartphones and low-cost external microphones comparable for measuring time-domain acoustic parameters?
Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2023. 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.
- Validity of Acoustic Measures Obtained Using Various Recording Methods Including Smartphones With and Without Headset Microphones.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2024Article
- Enhancing public health in developing nations through smartphone-based motor assessment.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- Applications and Challenges of Speech Emotion Recognition in Geriatric Healthcare: A Scoping Review.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study examined and compared the diagnostic accuracy and correlation levels of the acoustic parameters of the audio recordings obtained from smartphones on two operating systems and from dynamic and condenser types of external microphones.
methodThe study included 87 adults: 57 with voice disorder and 30 with a healthy voice. Each participant was asked to perform a sustained vowel phonation (/a/). The recordings were taken simultaneously using five microphones AKG-P220, Shure-SM58, Samson Go Mic, Apple iPhone 6, and Samsung Galaxy J7 Pro microphones in an acoustically insulated cabinet. Acoustic examinations were performed using Praat version 6.2.09. The data were examined using Pearson correlation and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analyses.
resultsThe parameters with the highest area under curve (AUC) values among all microphone recordings in the time-domain analyses were the frequency perturbation parameters. Additionally, considering the correlation coefficients obtained by synchronizing the microphones with each other and the AUC values together, the parameter with the highest correlation coefficient and diagnostic accuracy values was the jitter-local parameter.
conclusionPeriod-to-period perturbation parameters obtained from audio recordings made with smartphones show similar levels of diagnostic accuracy to external microphones used in clinical conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37584753What 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.