Efficacy of Cepstral Measures in Voice Disorder Diagnosis: A Literature Review
Abstract
Introduction: The acoustic analysis is one of the well-known methods for voice evaluation. In recent years, many studies have investigated the cepstral measures compared with the other former acoustic parameters. This review article evaluates the related studies in the cepstral areas to ascertain whether they are efficient in the diagnosis of dysphonia.
Materials and Methods: We reviewed the available research studies between 2009 and 2021 narratively in PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Science Direct databases. The searched keywords included “cepstral peak prominence”, “smoothed cepstral peak prominence”, “instrumental acoustic analysis”, “acoustic”, and “diagnosis”. The articles that investigated the power of Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) and its smoothed version (CPPS) to differentiate dysphonia versus normal voice have been included. However, the interventional studies that consider CPP and CPPS as one of their adjunct variables and studies that investigated the relationship of the cepstral measure with other parameters were not included.
Results: Recent studies support the efficiency of CPP and CPPS to diagnose dysphonia.
Conclusion: It is reasonable for the voice care teams to use CPP and CPPS in the patients’ initial assessment and track the effects of treatment. However, according to the relatively limited number of studies in this area, more studies are required to clarify the efficacy of cepstral measures in different voice pathologies.
1. Boone DR, McFarlane SC, Berg SLV, Zraick RI. The voice and voice therapy. London: Pearson; 2014. https://books.google.se/books?id=kkrDMgEACAAJ&dq=The+voice+an
2. Hasanvand A, Salehi A, Ebrahimipour M. A cepstral analysis of normal and pathologic voice qualities in Iranian adults: A comparative study. Journal of Voice. 2017; 31(4):508.e17-508.e23. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.10.017] [PMID]
3. Delgado-Hernández J, León-Gómez NM, Izquierdo-Arteaga LM, Llanos-Fumero Y. Cepstral analysis of normal and pathological voice in Spanish adults. Smoothed cepstral peak prominence in sustained vowels versus connected speech. Acta Otorrinolaringologica. 2018; 69(3):134-40. [DOI:10.1016/j.otoeng.2017.05.002]
4. Núñez-Batalla F, Cartón-Corona N, Vasile G, García-Cabo P, Fernández-Vañes L, Llorente-Pendás JL. Validation of the measures of cepstral peak prominence as a measure of dysphonia severity in Spanish-speaking subjects. Acta Otorrinolaringologica. 2019; 70(4):222-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.otoeng.2018.04.005]
5. Dejonckere PH, Bradley P, Clemente P, Cornut G, Crevier-Buchman L, Friedrich G, et al. A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. Guideline elaborated by the Committee on Phoniatrics of the European Laryngological Society (ELS). European Archives of Oto-Rhino-laryngology. 2001; 258(2):77-82. [DOI:10.1007/s004050000299] [PMID]
6. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Precoda K. Listener experience and perception of voice quality. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1990; 33(1):103-15. [PMID]
7. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Precoda K, Berke GS. Individual differences in voice quality perception. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1992; 35(3):512-20. [PMID]
8. Kent RD. Hearing and believing: Some limits to the auditory-perceptual assessment of speech and voice disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 1996; 5(3):7-23. [DOI:10.1044/1058-0360.0503.07]
9. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR. Sources of listener disagreement in voice quality assessment. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2000; 108(4):1867-76. [DOI:10.1121/1.1289362] [PMID]
10. Roy N, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Eadie T, Sivasankar MP, Mehta D, Paul D, et al. Evidence-based clinical voice assessment: A systematic review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2013; 22(2):212-26. [PMID]
11. Stemple JC, Roy N, Klaben B. Clinical voice pathology: Theory and management. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2014. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Clinical_Voice_Pathology/T2MnmwEACAAJ?hl=en
12. Maryn Y, Corthals P, Van Cauwenberge P, Roy N, De Bodt M. Toward improved ecological validity in the acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: Combining continuous speech and sustained vowels. Journal of Voice. 2010; 24(5):540-55. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.12.014] [PMID]
13. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice Hall; 2015. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Foundations_of_Clinical_Research/eiPyrQEACAAJ?hl=en
14. Parsa V, Jamieson DG. Acoustic discrimination of pathological voice: Sustained vowels versus continuous speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2001; 44(2):327-39. [PMID]
15. Heman-Ackah YD, Heuer RJ, Michael DD, Ostrowski R, Horman M, Baroody MM, et al. Cepstral peak prominence: A more reliable measure of dysphonia. The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology. 2003; 112(4):324-33. [DOI:10.1177/000348940311200406] [PMID]
16. Zraick RI, Wendel K, Smith-Olinde L. The effect of speaking task on perceptual judgment of the severity of dysphonic voice. Journal of Voice. 2005; 19(4):574-81. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2004.08.009] [PMID]
17. Askenfelt AG, Hammarberg B. Speech waveform perturbation analysis: A perceptual-acoustical comparison of seven measures. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1986; 29(1):50-64. [PMID]
18. Hillenbrand J, Houde RA. Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality: Dysphonic voices and continuous speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1996; 39(2):311-21. [PMID]
19. Hillenbrand J, Cleveland RA, Erickson RL. Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1994; 37(4):769-78. [PMID]
20. Noll AM. Cepstrum pitch determination. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1967; 41(2):293-309. [DOI:10.1121/1.1910339] [PMID]
21. Bogert BP. The quefrency alanysis of time series for echoes; Cepstrum, pseudo-autocovariance, cross-cepstrum and saphe cracking. Time Series Analysis. 1963:209-43. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10006519906/
22. Noll AM. Short-time spectrum and “cepstrum” techniques for vocal-pitch detection. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1964; 36(2):296-302. [DOI:10.1121/1.1918949]
23. Heman-Ackah YD, Sataloff RT, Laureyns G, Lurie D, Michael DD, Heuer R, et al. Quantifying the cepstral peak prominence, a measure of dysphonia. Journal of Voice. 2014; 28(6):783-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.05.005] [PMID]
24. Patel RR, Awan SN, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Courey M, Deliyski D, Eadie T, et al. Recommended protocols for instrumental assessment of voice: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association expert panel to develop a protocol for instrumental assessment of vocal function. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2018; 27(3):887-905. [PMID]
25. Leong K, Hawkshaw MJ, Dentchev D, Gupta R, Lurie D, Sataloff RT. Reliability of objective voice measures of normal speaking voices. Journal of Voice. 2013; 27(2):170-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2012.07.005] [PMID]
26. Heman-Ackah YD, Michael DD, Goding Jr GS. The relationship between cepstral peak prominence and selected parameters of dysphonia. Journal of Voice. 2002; 16(1):20-7. [DOI:10.1016/S0892-1997(02)00067-X]
27. Watts CR, Awan SN, Maryn Y. A comparison of cepstral peak prominence measures from two acoustic analysis programs. Journal of Voice. 2017; 31(3):387.e1-387.e10. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.09.012] [PMID]
28. Maryn Y, Roy N, De Bodt M, Van Cauwenberge P, Corthals P. Acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: A meta-analysis. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2009; 126(5):2619-34. [DOI:10.1121/1.3224706] [PMID]
29. Radish Kumar B, Bhat JS, Prasad N. Cepstral analysis of voice in persons with vocal nodules. Journal of Voice. 2010; 24(6):651-3. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2009.07.008] [PMID]
30. Balasubramanium RK, Bhat JS, Fahim S 3rd, Raju R 3rd. Cepstral analysis of voice in unilateral adductor vocal fold palsy. Journal of voice. 2011; 25(3):326-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2009.12.010] [PMID]
31. Watts CR, Awan SN. Use of spectral/cepstral analyses for differentiating normal from hypofunctional voices in sustained vowel and continuous speech contexts. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2011; 54(6):1525-37. [PMID]
32. Moers C, Möbius B, Rosanowski F, Nöth E, Eysholdt U, Haderlein T. Vowel-and text-based cepstral analysis of chronic hoarseness. Journal of Voice. 2012; 26(4):416-24. [PMID]
33. Lowell SY, Colton RH, Kelley RT, Mizia SA. Predictive value and discriminant capacity of cepstral-and spectral-based measures during continuous speech. Journal of Voice. 2013; 27(4):393-400. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.02.005] [PMID]
34. Brinca LF, Batista APF, Tavares AI, Gonçalves IC, Moreno ML. Use of cepstral analyses for differentiating normal from dysphonic voices: A comparative study of connected speech versus sustained vowel in European Portuguese female speakers. Journal of Voice. 2014; 28(3):282-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.10.001] [PMID]
35. Jannetts S, Lowit A. Cepstral analysis of hypokinetic and ataxic voices: Correlations with perceptual and other acoustic measures. Journal of Voice. 2014; 28(6):673-80. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.01.013] [PMID]
36. Maryn Y, Weenink D. Objective dysphonia measures in the program Praat: Smoothed cepstral peak prominence and acoustic voice quality index. Journal of Voice. 2015; 29(1):35-43. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.06.015] [PMID]
37. Sauder C, Bretl M, Eadie T. Predicting voice disorder status from smoothed measures of cepstral peak prominence using Praat and Analysis of Dysphonia in Speech and Voice (ADSV). Journal of Voice. 2017; 31(5):557-66. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.01.006] [PMID]
38. Esen Aydinli F, Özcebe E, İncebay Ö. Use of cepstral analysis for differentiating dysphonic from normal voices in children. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 2019; 116:107-13. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.10.029] [PMID]
39. Burk BR, Watts CR. The effect of Parkinson disease tremor phenotype on cepstral peak prominence and transglottal airflow in vowels and speech. Journal of Voice. 2019; 33(4):580.e11-580.e19. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.01.016] [PMID]
40. Kim GH, Bae IH, Park HJ, Lee YW. Comparison of cepstral analysis based on voiced-segment extraction and voice tasks for discriminating dysphonic and normophonic Korean speakers. Journal of Voice. 2021; 35(2):328.e11-328.e22. [PMID]
41. Belsky MA, Rothenberger SD, Gillespie AI, Gartner-Schmidt JL. Do phonatory aerodynamic and acoustic measures in connected speech differ between vocally healthy adults and patients diagnosed with muscle tension dysphonia? Journal of Voice. 2021; 35(4):663.e1-663.e7. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.12.019] [PMID]
42. Mizuta M, Abe C, Taguchi E, Takeue T, Tamaki H, Haji T. Validation of cepstral acoustic analysis for normal and pathological voice in the Japanese Language. Journal of Voice. 2020; S0892-1997(20)30325-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.08.026] [PMID]
43. Kkhoddami SM, Mehri A, Jahani Y. [The role of sex in glottic closure pattern in people with normal voice (Persian)]. Auditory and Vestibular Research. 2011; 20(1):64-72. https://www.sid.ir/en/Journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=206324
44. Cantor-Cutiva LC, Bottalico P, Nudelman C, Webster J, Hunter EJ. Do voice acoustic parameters differ between bilingual English-spanish speakers and monolingual English speakers during English productions? Journal of Voice. 2021; 35(2):194-202. [PMID]
45. Awan SN, Helou LB, Stojadinovic A, Solomon NP. Tracking voice change after thyroidectomy: Application of spectral/cepstral analyses. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics. 2011; 25(4):302-20. [PMID]
46. Awan SN, Roy N. Outcomes measurement in voice disorders: Application of an acoustic index of dysphonia severity. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2009; 52(2):482-99. [PMID]
2. Hasanvand A, Salehi A, Ebrahimipour M. A cepstral analysis of normal and pathologic voice qualities in Iranian adults: A comparative study. Journal of Voice. 2017; 31(4):508.e17-508.e23. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.10.017] [PMID]
3. Delgado-Hernández J, León-Gómez NM, Izquierdo-Arteaga LM, Llanos-Fumero Y. Cepstral analysis of normal and pathological voice in Spanish adults. Smoothed cepstral peak prominence in sustained vowels versus connected speech. Acta Otorrinolaringologica. 2018; 69(3):134-40. [DOI:10.1016/j.otoeng.2017.05.002]
4. Núñez-Batalla F, Cartón-Corona N, Vasile G, García-Cabo P, Fernández-Vañes L, Llorente-Pendás JL. Validation of the measures of cepstral peak prominence as a measure of dysphonia severity in Spanish-speaking subjects. Acta Otorrinolaringologica. 2019; 70(4):222-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.otoeng.2018.04.005]
5. Dejonckere PH, Bradley P, Clemente P, Cornut G, Crevier-Buchman L, Friedrich G, et al. A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. Guideline elaborated by the Committee on Phoniatrics of the European Laryngological Society (ELS). European Archives of Oto-Rhino-laryngology. 2001; 258(2):77-82. [DOI:10.1007/s004050000299] [PMID]
6. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Precoda K. Listener experience and perception of voice quality. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1990; 33(1):103-15. [PMID]
7. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Precoda K, Berke GS. Individual differences in voice quality perception. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1992; 35(3):512-20. [PMID]
8. Kent RD. Hearing and believing: Some limits to the auditory-perceptual assessment of speech and voice disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 1996; 5(3):7-23. [DOI:10.1044/1058-0360.0503.07]
9. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR. Sources of listener disagreement in voice quality assessment. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2000; 108(4):1867-76. [DOI:10.1121/1.1289362] [PMID]
10. Roy N, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Eadie T, Sivasankar MP, Mehta D, Paul D, et al. Evidence-based clinical voice assessment: A systematic review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2013; 22(2):212-26. [PMID]
11. Stemple JC, Roy N, Klaben B. Clinical voice pathology: Theory and management. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2014. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Clinical_Voice_Pathology/T2MnmwEACAAJ?hl=en
12. Maryn Y, Corthals P, Van Cauwenberge P, Roy N, De Bodt M. Toward improved ecological validity in the acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: Combining continuous speech and sustained vowels. Journal of Voice. 2010; 24(5):540-55. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.12.014] [PMID]
13. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice Hall; 2015. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Foundations_of_Clinical_Research/eiPyrQEACAAJ?hl=en
14. Parsa V, Jamieson DG. Acoustic discrimination of pathological voice: Sustained vowels versus continuous speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2001; 44(2):327-39. [PMID]
15. Heman-Ackah YD, Heuer RJ, Michael DD, Ostrowski R, Horman M, Baroody MM, et al. Cepstral peak prominence: A more reliable measure of dysphonia. The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology. 2003; 112(4):324-33. [DOI:10.1177/000348940311200406] [PMID]
16. Zraick RI, Wendel K, Smith-Olinde L. The effect of speaking task on perceptual judgment of the severity of dysphonic voice. Journal of Voice. 2005; 19(4):574-81. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2004.08.009] [PMID]
17. Askenfelt AG, Hammarberg B. Speech waveform perturbation analysis: A perceptual-acoustical comparison of seven measures. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1986; 29(1):50-64. [PMID]
18. Hillenbrand J, Houde RA. Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality: Dysphonic voices and continuous speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1996; 39(2):311-21. [PMID]
19. Hillenbrand J, Cleveland RA, Erickson RL. Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1994; 37(4):769-78. [PMID]
20. Noll AM. Cepstrum pitch determination. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1967; 41(2):293-309. [DOI:10.1121/1.1910339] [PMID]
21. Bogert BP. The quefrency alanysis of time series for echoes; Cepstrum, pseudo-autocovariance, cross-cepstrum and saphe cracking. Time Series Analysis. 1963:209-43. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10006519906/
22. Noll AM. Short-time spectrum and “cepstrum” techniques for vocal-pitch detection. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1964; 36(2):296-302. [DOI:10.1121/1.1918949]
23. Heman-Ackah YD, Sataloff RT, Laureyns G, Lurie D, Michael DD, Heuer R, et al. Quantifying the cepstral peak prominence, a measure of dysphonia. Journal of Voice. 2014; 28(6):783-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.05.005] [PMID]
24. Patel RR, Awan SN, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Courey M, Deliyski D, Eadie T, et al. Recommended protocols for instrumental assessment of voice: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association expert panel to develop a protocol for instrumental assessment of vocal function. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 2018; 27(3):887-905. [PMID]
25. Leong K, Hawkshaw MJ, Dentchev D, Gupta R, Lurie D, Sataloff RT. Reliability of objective voice measures of normal speaking voices. Journal of Voice. 2013; 27(2):170-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2012.07.005] [PMID]
26. Heman-Ackah YD, Michael DD, Goding Jr GS. The relationship between cepstral peak prominence and selected parameters of dysphonia. Journal of Voice. 2002; 16(1):20-7. [DOI:10.1016/S0892-1997(02)00067-X]
27. Watts CR, Awan SN, Maryn Y. A comparison of cepstral peak prominence measures from two acoustic analysis programs. Journal of Voice. 2017; 31(3):387.e1-387.e10. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.09.012] [PMID]
28. Maryn Y, Roy N, De Bodt M, Van Cauwenberge P, Corthals P. Acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: A meta-analysis. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2009; 126(5):2619-34. [DOI:10.1121/1.3224706] [PMID]
29. Radish Kumar B, Bhat JS, Prasad N. Cepstral analysis of voice in persons with vocal nodules. Journal of Voice. 2010; 24(6):651-3. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2009.07.008] [PMID]
30. Balasubramanium RK, Bhat JS, Fahim S 3rd, Raju R 3rd. Cepstral analysis of voice in unilateral adductor vocal fold palsy. Journal of voice. 2011; 25(3):326-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2009.12.010] [PMID]
31. Watts CR, Awan SN. Use of spectral/cepstral analyses for differentiating normal from hypofunctional voices in sustained vowel and continuous speech contexts. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2011; 54(6):1525-37. [PMID]
32. Moers C, Möbius B, Rosanowski F, Nöth E, Eysholdt U, Haderlein T. Vowel-and text-based cepstral analysis of chronic hoarseness. Journal of Voice. 2012; 26(4):416-24. [PMID]
33. Lowell SY, Colton RH, Kelley RT, Mizia SA. Predictive value and discriminant capacity of cepstral-and spectral-based measures during continuous speech. Journal of Voice. 2013; 27(4):393-400. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.02.005] [PMID]
34. Brinca LF, Batista APF, Tavares AI, Gonçalves IC, Moreno ML. Use of cepstral analyses for differentiating normal from dysphonic voices: A comparative study of connected speech versus sustained vowel in European Portuguese female speakers. Journal of Voice. 2014; 28(3):282-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.10.001] [PMID]
35. Jannetts S, Lowit A. Cepstral analysis of hypokinetic and ataxic voices: Correlations with perceptual and other acoustic measures. Journal of Voice. 2014; 28(6):673-80. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.01.013] [PMID]
36. Maryn Y, Weenink D. Objective dysphonia measures in the program Praat: Smoothed cepstral peak prominence and acoustic voice quality index. Journal of Voice. 2015; 29(1):35-43. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.06.015] [PMID]
37. Sauder C, Bretl M, Eadie T. Predicting voice disorder status from smoothed measures of cepstral peak prominence using Praat and Analysis of Dysphonia in Speech and Voice (ADSV). Journal of Voice. 2017; 31(5):557-66. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.01.006] [PMID]
38. Esen Aydinli F, Özcebe E, İncebay Ö. Use of cepstral analysis for differentiating dysphonic from normal voices in children. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 2019; 116:107-13. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.10.029] [PMID]
39. Burk BR, Watts CR. The effect of Parkinson disease tremor phenotype on cepstral peak prominence and transglottal airflow in vowels and speech. Journal of Voice. 2019; 33(4):580.e11-580.e19. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.01.016] [PMID]
40. Kim GH, Bae IH, Park HJ, Lee YW. Comparison of cepstral analysis based on voiced-segment extraction and voice tasks for discriminating dysphonic and normophonic Korean speakers. Journal of Voice. 2021; 35(2):328.e11-328.e22. [PMID]
41. Belsky MA, Rothenberger SD, Gillespie AI, Gartner-Schmidt JL. Do phonatory aerodynamic and acoustic measures in connected speech differ between vocally healthy adults and patients diagnosed with muscle tension dysphonia? Journal of Voice. 2021; 35(4):663.e1-663.e7. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.12.019] [PMID]
42. Mizuta M, Abe C, Taguchi E, Takeue T, Tamaki H, Haji T. Validation of cepstral acoustic analysis for normal and pathological voice in the Japanese Language. Journal of Voice. 2020; S0892-1997(20)30325-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.08.026] [PMID]
43. Kkhoddami SM, Mehri A, Jahani Y. [The role of sex in glottic closure pattern in people with normal voice (Persian)]. Auditory and Vestibular Research. 2011; 20(1):64-72. https://www.sid.ir/en/Journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=206324
44. Cantor-Cutiva LC, Bottalico P, Nudelman C, Webster J, Hunter EJ. Do voice acoustic parameters differ between bilingual English-spanish speakers and monolingual English speakers during English productions? Journal of Voice. 2021; 35(2):194-202. [PMID]
45. Awan SN, Helou LB, Stojadinovic A, Solomon NP. Tracking voice change after thyroidectomy: Application of spectral/cepstral analyses. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics. 2011; 25(4):302-20. [PMID]
46. Awan SN, Roy N. Outcomes measurement in voice disorders: Application of an acoustic index of dysphonia severity. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2009; 52(2):482-99. [PMID]
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 16 No 2 (2022) | |
| Section | Review Article(s) | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/jmr.v16i2.9298 | |
| Keywords | ||
| Voice Voice disorders Dysphonia Voice quality Acoustics | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
How to Cite
1.
Aghajanzadeh M, Saeedi S. Efficacy of Cepstral Measures in Voice Disorder Diagnosis: A Literature Review. jmr. 2022;16(2):120-129.
