ArticleFolia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP)2024
Plug-and-Play Microphones for Recording Speech and Voice with Smart Devices.
Article in Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP), 2024. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- ParkinSong Online: Feasibility of Telehealth Delivery and Remote Data Collection for a Therapeutic Group Singing Study in Parkinson's.Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2024Trial
- Screening for depression risk via smartphone narratives with fully fine-tuned WavLM.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Utility of Speech and Language Analytics for Screening Alzheimer's Disease.Neuro-degenerative diseases · 2026Review
- Developing digital health technologies for frontotemporal degeneration.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Review
- 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
- Quantitative Speech Assessment in Ataxia-Consensus Recommendations by the Ataxia Global Initiative Working Group on Digital-Motor Markers.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSmart devices are widely available and capable of quickly recording and uploading speech segments for health-related analysis. The switch from laboratory recordings with professional-grade microphone setups to remote, smart device-based recordings offers immense potential for the scalability of voice assessment. Yet, a growing body of literature points to a wide heterogeneity among acoustic metrics for their robustness to variation in recording devices. The addition of consumer-grade plug-and-play microphones has been proposed as a possible solution. The aim of our study was to assess if the addition of consumer-grade plug-and-play microphones increases the acoustic measurement agreement between ultra-portable devices and a reference microphone.
methodsSpeech was simultaneously recorded by a reference high-quality microphone commonly used in research and by two configurations with plug-and-play microphones. Twelve speech-acoustic features were calculated using recordings from each microphone to determine the agreement intervals in measurements between microphones. Agreement intervals were then compared to expected deviations in speech in various neurological conditions. Each microphone's response to speech and to silence was characterized through acoustic analysis to explore possible reasons for differences in acoustic measurements between microphones. The statistical differentiation of two groups, neurotypical and people with multiple sclerosis, using metrics from each tested microphone was compared to that of the reference microphone.
resultsThe two consumer-grade plug-and-play microphones favored high frequencies (mean center of gravity difference ≥ +175.3 Hz) and recorded more noise (mean difference in signal to noise ≤ -4.2 dB) when compared to the reference microphone. Between consumer-grade microphones, differences in relative noise were closely related to distance between the microphone and the speaker's mouth. Agreement intervals between the reference and consumer-grade microphones remained under disease-expected deviations only for fundamental frequency (f0, agreement interval ≤0.06 Hz), f0 instability (f0 CoV, agreement interval ≤0.05%), and tracking of second formant movement (agreement interval ≤1.4 Hz/ms). Agreement between microphones was poor for other metrics, particularly for fine timing metrics (mean pause length and pause length variability for various tasks). The statistical difference between the two groups of speakers was smaller with the plug-and-play than with the reference microphone.
conclusionMeasurement of f0 and F2 slope was robust to variation in recording equipment, while other acoustic metrics were not. Thus, the tested plug-and-play microphones should not be used interchangeably with professional-grade microphones for speech analysis. Plug-and-play microphones may assist in equipment standardization within speech studies, including remote or self-recording, possibly with small loss in accuracy and statistical power as observed in the current study.
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.