Advertisement

Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) in the Measurement of Voice Quality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Thirunavukkarasu Jayakumar
    Correspondence
    Address correspondence and reprint requests to Thirunavukkarasu Jayakumar, Department of Speech-Language Sciences, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, University of Mysore, Manasagangothri, Mysuru, Karnataka, India 570006.
    Affiliations
    Department of Speech-Language Sciences, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, University of Mysore, Mysuru, Karnataka, India
    Search for articles by this author
  • Jesnu Jose Benoy
    Affiliations
    Department of Speech-Language Sciences, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, University of Mysore, Mysuru, Karnataka, India
    Search for articles by this author

      Summary

      Introduction

      Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) is a multiparametric construct of voice quality recognized for its clinical and research applications around the globe. This study aimed to review the validity and diagnostic accuracy of AVQI (v02&03) and determine the effects of age and gender.

      Methods

      This is a systematic review and meta-analysis registered with the PROSPERO registry. The authors searched two databases (PubMed and Cochrane Library database) for relevant studies. Studies selected for the systematic review were grouped based on study objectives. To determine the quality of the selected studies, the authors utilized the QUADAS-2 tool.

      Results

      Meta-analysis of seven studies on AVQIv02 revealed a diagnostic threshold ranging from 2.72 to 3.33 for AVQIv02. In comparison, eight studies investigating AVQIv03 suggested a diagnostic threshold ranging from 1.33 to 3.15 for AVQIv03. Altogether, these studies demonstrated a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.85 and 0.92 for AVQIv02 and 0.82 and 0.92 for AVQIv03. The Area under the Curve was slightly better for AVQIv03 (0.94) than AVQIv02 (0.92). Three studies investigating the effect of age and gender on AVQI had a consensus that AVQI is independent of gender. However, findings were contradictory about the impact of age on AVQI.

      Conclusions

      AVQI is found to be a valid tool for the assessment of voice quality. AVQIv03 is slightly better than AVQIv02 in its diagnostic accuracy. AVQI is independent of gender. Because of the contradictory evidence, additional research on the effects of age on AVQI is necessary.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Voice
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      REFERENCES

        • Boominathan P
        • Samuel J
        • Arunachalam R
        • et al.
        Multi parametric voice assessment: Sri Ramachandra university protocol.
        Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014; 66: 246-251https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-011-0460-y
        • Dejonckere PH
        • Bradley P
        • Clemente P
        • et al.
        A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques.
        Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2001; 258: 77-82https://doi.org/10.1007/s004050000299
        • Patel RR
        • Awan SN
        • Barkmeier-Kraemer J
        • 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.
        Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018; 27: 887-905https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0009
        • Maryn Y
        • Roy N
        • de Bodt M
        • et al.
        Acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: a meta-analysis.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 2009; 126: 2619-2634https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3224706
        • Wuyts FL
        • Bodt MS de
        • Molenberghs G
        • et al.
        The dysphonia severity index.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2000; 43: 796-809https://doi.org/10.1044/jslhr.4303.796
        • Hartl DM
        • Hans S
        • Vaissière J
        • et al.
        Objective acoustic and aerodynamic measures of breathiness in paralytic dysphonia.
        Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2003; 260: 175-182https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-002-0542-2
        • Klein S
        • Piccirillo JF
        • Painter C.
        Student research award 1999: comparative contrast of voice measurements.
        Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery. 2000; 123: 164-169https://doi.org/10.1067/mhn.2000.107682
        • Yu P
        • Ouaknine M
        • Revis J
        • et al.
        Objective voice analysis for dysphonic patients.
        J Voice. 2001; 15: 529-542https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(01)00053-4
        • Yu P
        • Revis J
        • Wuyts FL
        • et al.
        Correlation of instrumental voice evaluation with perceptual voice analysis using a modified visual analog scale.
        Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2002; 54: 271-281https://doi.org/10.1159/000066150
        • Watts CR
        • Awan SN.
        Laryngeal Function and Voice Disorders Basic Science to Clinical Practice.
        Thieme, 2019
        • Maryn Y
        • Corthals P
        • van Cauwenberge P
        • et al.
        Toward improved ecological validity in the acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: combining continuous speech and sustained vowels.
        J Voice. 2010; 24: 540-555https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.12.014
        • Awan SN
        • Solomon NP
        • Helou LB
        • et al.
        Spectral-cepstral estimation of dysphonia severity: external validation.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2013; 122https://doi.org/10.1177/000348941312200108
        • Maryn Y
        • Weenink D.
        Objective dysphonia measures in the program praat: smoothed cepstral peak prominence and acoustic voice quality index.
        J Voice. 2015; 29: 35-43https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.06.015
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Lehnert B
        • Janotte B.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 and acoustic breathiness index in German.
        J Voice. 2020; 34: e17-157.e25https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.07.026
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y.
        The improvement of internal consistency of the acoustic voice quality index.
        Am J Otolaryngol. 2015; 36: 647-656https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2015.04.012
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y.
        External validation of the acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 with extended representativity.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2016; 125: 571-583https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489416636131
        • Bhatt SS
        • Kabra S
        • Chatterjee I.
        A comparative study on acoustic voice quality index between the subjects with spasmodic dysphonia and normophonia.
        Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021; (Published online February 28)https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-021-02448-5
        • Lehnert B
        • Janotte B.
        Evaluation of the questionnaire on voice self-concept by ENT tumor patients.
        Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie. 2019; 98: 339-344https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0816-5728
        • León Gómez NM
        • Delgado Hernández J
        • Luis Hernández J
        • et al.
        Objective analysis of voice quality in patients with thyroid pathology.
        Clin Otolaryngol. 2022; 47: 81-87https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.13860
        • Maryn Y
        • Kim HT
        • Kim J.
        Auditory-perceptual and acoustic methods in measuring dysphonia severity of Korean speech.
        J Voice. 2016; 30: 587-594https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.06.011
        • Núñez-Batalla F
        • Díaz-Fresno E
        • Álvarez-Fernández A
        • et al.
        Application of the acoustic voice quality index for objective measurement of dysphonia severity.
        Acta Otorrinolaringol (English Edition). 2017; 68: 204-211https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otoeng.2017.06.007
        • Priss I
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Jäger-Priss U
        • et al.
        Questionnaire for the assessment of the voice self-concept in a neurological practice : Applicability for the identification of patients with high consultation needs.
        Nervenarzt. 2019; 90: 601-608https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-018-0642-x
        • Reynolds V
        • Meldrum S
        • Simmer K
        • et al.
        Dysphonia in extremely preterm children: a longitudinal observation.
        Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2015; 41: 1-5https://doi.org/10.3109/14015439.2015.1054307
        • Reynolds V
        • Buckland A
        • Bailey J
        • et al.
        Objective assessment of pediatric voice disorders with the acoustic voice quality index.
        J Voice. 2012; 26: 672.e1-672.e7https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2012.02.002
        • Sagiroglu S
        • Kurtul N.
        The effect of supraclavicular radiotherapy on acoustic voice quality index (AVQI), spectral amplitude and perturbation values.
        J Voice. 2020; 34: 649.e7-649.e13https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.01.003
        • Maryn Y
        • de Bodt M
        • Roy N.
        The acoustic voice quality index: toward improved treatment outcomes assessment in voice disorders.
        J Commun Disord. 2010; 43: 161-174https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2009.12.004
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B.
        Preliminary study of Novafon local vibration voice therapy for dysphonia treatment.
        Logop Phoniatr Vocol. 2020; 45: 1-9https://doi.org/10.1080/14015439.2018.1453541
        • Hosokawa K
        • Barsties B
        • Iwahashi T
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index in the japanese language.
        J Voice. 2017; 31: 260.e1-260.e9https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.05.010
        • Meerschman I
        • Lierde K
        • Ketels J
        • et al.
        Effect of three semi-occluded vocal tract therapy programmes on the phonation of patients with dysphonia: lip trill, water-resistance therapy and straw phonation.
        Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2019; 54: 50-61https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12431
        • Tattari N
        • Forss M
        • Laukkanen AM
        • et al.
        The efficacy of the NHS waterpipe in superficial hydration for people with healthy voices: effects on acoustic voice quality, phonation threshold pressure and subjective sensations.
        J Voice. 2021; (Published online October)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.08.012
        • Thijs Z
        • Knickerbocker K
        • Watts CR.
        Epidemiological patterns and treatment outcomes in a private practice community voice clinic.
        J Voice. 2020; (Published online July)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.06.025
        • van Sluis KE
        • van Son RJJH
        • van der Molen L
        • et al.
        Multidimensional evaluation of voice outcomes following total laryngectomy: a prospective multicenter cohort study.
        Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2021; 278: 1209-1222https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06216-z
        • Faham M
        • Laukkanen AM
        • Ikävalko T
        • et al.
        Acoustic voice quality index as a potential tool for voice screening.
        J Voice. 2021; 35: 226-232https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.08.017
        • Lee Y
        • Kim G
        • Sohn K
        • et al.
        The usefulness of auditory perceptual assessment and acoustic analysis as a screening test for voice problems.
        Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2021; 73: 34-41https://doi.org/10.1159/000504220
        • Ulozaite-Staniene N
        • Petrauskas T
        • Šaferis V
        • et al.
        Exploring the feasibility of the combination of acoustic voice quality index and glottal function index for voice pathology screening.
        Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019; 276: 1737-1745https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-019-05433-5
        • Anand S
        • Bottalico P
        • Gray C.
        Vocal fatigue in prospective vocal professionals.
        J Voice. 2021; 35: 247-258https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.08.015
        • D'haeseleer E
        • Meerschman I
        • Claeys S
        • et al.
        Vocal quality in theater actors.
        J Voice. 2017; 31: 510.e7-510.e14https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.11.008
        • D'haeseleer E
        • Quintyn F
        • Kissel I
        • et al.
        Vocal quality, symptoms, and habits in musical theater actors.
        J Voice. 2020; (Published online July 2)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.05.019
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Englert M
        • Lucero JC
        • et al.
        The performance of the acoustic voice quality index and acoustic breathiness index in synthesized voices.
        J Voice. 2021; (Published online July)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.05.005
        • Uloza V
        • Ulozaitė-Stanienė N
        • Petrauskas T
        • et al.
        Accuracy of acoustic voice quality index captured with a smartphone – measurements with added ambient noise.
        J Voice. 2021; (Published online March 4)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.01.025
        • Maryn Y
        • Wuyts FL
        • Zarowski A.
        Are acoustic markers of voice and speech signals affected by nose-and-mouth-covering respiratory protective masks?.
        J Voice. 2021; (Published online February)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.01.013
        • Son RJJH van
        Measuring voice quality parameters after speaker pseudonymization.
        in: Interspeech 2021. ISCA. 2021: 1019-1023https://doi.org/10.21437/Interspeech.2021-26
        • Schiller IS
        • Remacle A
        • Morsomme D.
        Imitating dysphonic voice: a suitable technique to create speech stimuli for spoken language processing tasks?.
        Logop Phoniatr Vocol. 2020; 45: 143-150https://doi.org/10.1080/14015439.2019.1659410
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Ulozaitė-Stanienė N
        • Petrauskas T
        • et al.
        Diagnostic accuracy of dysphonia classification of DSI and AVQI.
        Laryngoscope. 2019; 129: 692-698https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.27350
        • Uloza V
        • Latoszek BB v.
        • Ulozaite-Staniene N
        • et al.
        A comparison of dysphonia severity index and acoustic voice quality index measures in differentiating normal and dysphonic voices.
        Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2018; 275: 949-958https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-4903-x
        • Lee JM
        • Roy N
        • Peterson E
        • et al.
        Comparison of two multiparameter acoustic indices of dysphonia severity: the acoustic voice quality index and cepstral spectral index of dysphonia.
        J Voice. 2018; 32: 515.e1-515.e13https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.06.012
        • Pommée T
        • Maryn Y
        • Finck C
        • et al.
        The acoustic voice quality index, version 03.01, in French and the voice handicap index.
        J Voice. 2020; 34: 646.e1-646.e10https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.11.017
        • Englert M
        • Lopes L
        • Vieira V
        • et al.
        Accuracy of acoustic voice quality index and its isolated acoustic measures to discriminate the severity of voice disorders.
        J Voice. 2020; (Published online August)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.08.010
        • Lee YW
        • Kim GH
        • Kwon SB.
        The usefulness of auditory perceptual assessment and acoustic analysis for classifying the voice severity.
        J Voice. 2020; 34: 884-893https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.04.013
        • Barsties B
        • de Bodt M.
        Assessment of voice quality: current state-of-the-art.
        Auris Nasus Larynx. 2015; 42: 183-188https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anl.2014.11.001
        • Stappenbeck L
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Janotte B
        • et al.
        Acoustic voice quality index and acoustic breathiness index as two examples for strengths and weaknesses of free software in medicine.
        Biomed Signal Process Control. 2020; 59101938https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2020.101938
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y.
        The acoustic voice quality index. Toward expanded measurement of dysphonia severity in German subjects.
        HNO. 2012; 60: 715-720https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-012-2499-9
        • Delgado Hernández J
        • León Gómez NM
        • Jiménez A
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 and the acoustic breathiness index in the Spanish language.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2018; 127: 317-326https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489418761096
        • Englert M
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Maryn Y
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index, version 03.01, to the Brazilian Portuguese language.
        J Voice. 2021; 35: 160.e15-160.e21https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.07.024
        • Fantini M
        • Ricci Maccarini A
        • Firino A
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index (AVQI) Version 03.01 in Italian.
        J Voice. 2021; (Published online March)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.02.029
        • Hosokawa K
        • Barsties v Latoszek B
        • Iwahashi T
        • et al.
        The acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 for the Japanese-speaking population.
        J Voice. 2019; 33: 125.e1-125.e12https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.10.003
        • Kankare E
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Maryn Y
        • et al.
        The acoustic voice quality index version 02.02 in the Finnish-speaking population.
        Logop Phoniatr Vocol. 2020; 45: 49-56https://doi.org/10.1080/14015439.2018.1556332
        • Kim GH
        • Lee YW
        • Bae IH
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index in the Korean language.
        J Voice. 2019; 33: 948.e1-948.e9https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.06.007
        • Kim GH
        • von Latoszek BB
        • Lee YW.
        Validation of acoustic voice quality index version 3.01 and acoustic breathiness index in Korean population.
        J Voice. 2021; 35: 660.e9-660.e18https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.10.005
        • Kishore Pebbili G
        • Shabnam S
        • Pushpavathi M
        • et al.
        Diagnostic accuracy of acoustic voice quality index version 02.03 in discriminating across the perceptual degrees of dysphonia severity in Kannada language.
        J Voice. 2021; 35: 159.e11-159.e18https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.07.010
        • Uloza V
        • Petrauskas T
        • Padervinskis E
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index in the Lithuanian language.
        J Voice. 2017; 31: 257.e1-257.e11https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.06.002
        • Yeşilli-Puzella G
        • Tadıhan-Özkan E
        • Maryn Y.
        Validation and test-retest reliability of acoustic voice quality index version 02.06 in the Turkish language.
        J Voice. 2020; (Published online September)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.08.021
        • Pommée T
        • Maryn Y
        • Finck C
        • et al.
        Validation of the acoustic voice quality index, version 03.01, in French.
        J Voice. 2020; 34: 646.e11-646.e26https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.12.008
        • Englert M
        • Lima L
        • Latoszek BB v.
        • et al.
        Influence of the voice sample length in perceptual and acoustic voice quality analysis.
        J Voice. 2020; (Published online August)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.07.010
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Maryn Y
        • Gerrits E
        • et al.
        The acoustic breathiness index (ABI): a multivariate acoustic model for breathiness.
        J Voice. 2017; 31: 511.e11-511.e27https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JVOICE.2016.11.017
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Kim G
        • Delgado Hernández J
        • et al.
        The validity of the acoustic breathiness index in the evaluation of breathy voice quality: a meta-analysis.
        Clin Otolaryngol. 2021; 46: 31-40https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.13629
        • Kim GH
        • Lee YW
        • Bae IH
        • et al.
        Comparison of two versions of the acoustic voice quality index for quantification of dysphonia severity.
        J Voice. 2020; 34: 489.e11-489.e19https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.11.013
        • Page MJ
        • McKenzie JE
        • Bossuyt PM
        • et al.
        The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.
        BMJ. 2021; (Published online March 29n71)https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
        • Adams RJ
        • Smart P
        • Huff AS.
        Shades of grey: guidelines for working with the grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies.
        Int J Manag Rev. 2017; 19https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12102
        • Schöpfel J
        • Prost H.
        How scientific papers mention grey literature: a scientometric study based on Scopus data.
        Collection and Curation. 2021; 40: 77-82https://doi.org/10.1108/CC-12-2019-0044
        • Hartling L
        • Featherstone R
        • Nuspl M
        • et al.
        Grey literature in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies and dissertations to the results of meta-analyses in child-relevant reviews.
        BMC Med Res Method. 2017; 17https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0347-z
        • Ouzzani M
        • Hammady H
        • Fedorowicz Z
        • et al.
        Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews.
        Systematic Reviews. 2016; 5https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
        • Whiting PF.
        QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies.
        Ann Intern Med. 2011; 155: 529https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009
        • Gunjawate DR
        • Ravi R
        • Bellur R.
        Acoustic analysis of voice in singers: a systematic review.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018; 61: 40-51https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_JSLHR-S-17-0145
        • Zamora J
        • Abraira V
        • Muriel A
        • et al.
        Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data.
        BMC Med Res Method. 2006; 6https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-31
      1. Review Manager (RevMan). Published online 2020.

        • Kim KW
        • Lee J
        • Choi SH
        • et al.
        Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating diagnostic test accuracy: a practical review for clinical researchers-part I. General guidance and tips.
        Korean J Radiol. 2015; 16: 1175https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2015.16.6.1175
        • Huedo-Medina TB
        • Sánchez-Meca J
        • Marín-Martínez F
        • et al.
        Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index?.
        Psychol Methods. 2006; 11: 193-206https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.11.2.193
        • Lee J
        • Kim KW
        • Choi SH
        • et al.
        Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating diagnostic test accuracy: a practical review for clinical researchers-part II. statistical methods of meta-analysis.
        Korean J Radiol. 2015; 16: 1188https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2015.16.6.1188
        • Higgins JPT.
        Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.
        BMJ. 2003; 327: 557-560https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
        • Chappell FM
        • Raab GM
        • Wardlaw JM.
        When are summary ROC curves appropriate for diagnostic meta-analyses?.
        Stat Med. 2009; 28: 2653-2668https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3631
        • Walter SD.
        Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data.
        Stat Med. 2002; 21: 1237-1256https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1099
        • Landis JR
        • Koch GG.
        The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.
        Biometrics. 1977; 33: 159-174
        • Schober P
        • Boer C
        • Schwarte LA.
        Correlation coefficients.
        Anesth Analg. 2018; 126: 1763-1768https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864
        • Barsties v. Latoszek B
        • Ulozaitė-Stanienė N
        • Maryn Y
        • et al.
        The influence of gender and age on the acoustic voice quality index and dysphonia severity index: a normative study.
        J Voice. 2019; 33: 340-345https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.11.011
        • Jayakumar T
        • Benoy JJ
        • Yasin HM.
        Effect of age and gender on acoustic voice quality index across lifespan: a cross-sectional study in Indian population.
        J Voice. 2020; (Published online June)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.05.025
        • Shabnam S
        • Pushpavathi M.
        Effect of gender on acoustic voice quality index 02.03 and dysphonia severity index in Indian normophonic adults.
        Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021; (Published online July 2)https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-021-02712-8
        • Kreiman J
        • Gerratt BR
        • Kempster GB
        • et al.
        Perceptual evaluation of voice quality: review, tutorial, and a framework for future research.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1993; 36: 21-40https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3601.21
        • Batthyany C
        • Maryn Y
        • Trauwaen I
        • et al.
        A Case of Specificity: how does the acoustic voice quality index perform in normophonic subjects?.
        Appl Sci. 2019; 9: 2527https://doi.org/10.3390/app9122527
        • Narasimhan S
        • Rashmi R.
        Multiparameter voice assessment in dysphonics: correlation between objective and perceptual parameters.
        J Voice. July 2020; (Published online)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.06.009
        • Gerratt BR
        • Kreiman J
        • Garellek M.
        Comparing measures of voice quality from sustained phonation and continuous speech.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016; 59: 994-1001https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_JSLHR-S-15-0307
        • Lechien JR
        • Morsomme D
        • Finck C
        • et al.
        The effect of the speech task characteristics on perceptual judgment of mild to moderate dysphonia: a methodological study.
        Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2018; 70: 156-164https://doi.org/10.1159/000492219
        • Liu Y
        • Lee T
        • Law T
        • et al.
        Prediction of voice disorder severity: contributions from sustained vowels and continuous speech.
        in: 11th International Symposium on Chinese Spoken Language Processing (ISCSLP). IEEE. 2018: 290-294https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCSLP.2018.8706612
        • Maryn Y
        • Roy N.
        Sustained vowels and continuous speech in the auditory-perceptual evaluation of dysphonia severity.
        J Soc Bras Fonoaudiol. 2012; 24: 107-112https://doi.org/10.1590/S2179-64912012000200003
        • Maryn Y
        • de Bodt M
        • Barsties B
        • et al.
        The value of the acoustic voice quality index as a measure of dysphonia severity in subjects speaking different languages.
        Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013; 271: 1609-1619https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2730-7
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y.
        Test-retest variability and internal consistency of the acoustic voice quality index.
        HNO. 2013; 61: 399-403https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-012-2649-0
        • Hegde MN
        • Salvatore AP
        Clinical Research in Communication Disorders: Principles and Strategies.
        4th ed. Plural Publishing, 2019
        • Monnappa D
        • Balasubramanium R.
        Cepstral analysis of voice in healthy aged individuals.
        J Laryngol Voice. 2015; 5: 34https://doi.org/10.4103/2230-9748.183963
        • Watts CR
        • Ronshaugen R
        • Saenz D.
        The effect of age and vocal task on cepstral/spectral measures of vocal function in adult males.
        Clin Linguist Phon. 2015; 29: 415-423https://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2015.1005673
        • Jayakumar T.
        Phonatory stability of voice in children.
        in: Proceedings of Frontiers of Research in Speech and Music. 2007: 85-88
        • Stathopoulos ET
        • Huber JE
        • Sussman JE.
        Changes in acoustic characteristics of the voice across the life span: measures from individuals 4–93 years of age.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011; 54: 1011-1021https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0036