ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
A Comparative Study of Acoustic Feature Extraction Using CSL and Web Prototype of LIS-N Application.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Conventional clinical acoustic analysis systems are confined to specialized clinical environments, which limits scalable and remote voice monitoring. This study aimed to validate LIS-N, a web-based prototype of a novel mobile application that uses the open-source Praat-Parselmouth library for acoustic feature extraction, against the Computerized Speech Lab (CSL), the clinical reference standard, to assess its potential for telehealth and longitudinal voice assessment before integration into clinical or research workflows. Method: Twenty adult volunteers without voice complaints or diagnosed dysphonia completed three voice tasks across three consecutive days at a tertiary academic voice center in quiet isolated rooms. All participants completed the full protocol across three consecutive days. Voice tasks included Rainbow Passage reading, sustained vowel /i/, and maximum phonation time /a/. Audio was captured concurrently using CSL and the LIS-N prototype, which uses Praat-Parselmouth for acoustic feature extraction. To isolate the contributions of recording hardware and analysis software, four cross-system conditions were also examined. Agreement was assessed using Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analyses. Session-to-session trajectory correlations were computed to evaluate temporal consistency across systems. Results: Fundamental frequency and Pitch Mean demonstrated excellent agreement across all tasks and conditions (r > 0.98), with robustness to hardware and software differences. Pitch Minimum and Pitch Maximum showed strong agreement during sustained vowel tasks. Energy-based features showed moderate agreement, with variability driven primarily by microphone differences, and same-microphone conditions yielded substantially stronger energy agreement. Perturbation measures including jitter, shimmer and CPP showed consistently poor cross-platform agreement, consistent with prior literature. Conclusion: This study provides proof of concept for the viability of open-source acoustic frameworks as accessible alternatives to proprietary clinical systems, while also identifying limitations. Both systems should be interpreted separately, as each remains reliable within its own framework. The LIS-N prototype demonstrated strong agreement for frequency-based voice measures and consistent longitudinal monitoring, supporting adoption of open-source acoustic tools in telehealth and remote voice monitoring.
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.