A Comprehensive Application for Grading Severity of Voice Based on Acoustic Voice Quality Index v.02.03

Published:October 01, 2022DOI:


      Acoustic Voice Quality Index is a six-variable acoustic model for the multiparametric measurement developed by Maryn et al. Studies have provided evidence regarding the practical usefullness, internal consistency, external validity, diagnostic accuracy, and responsiveness to change of AVQI. Recently, researchers have been exploring the utility of AVQI in classifying the voice severity. The aim of the present study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the AVQI v.02.03 in discriminating across the perceptual levels of dysphonia severity in 18-40 years age range in Kannada speaking population; and to develop an application to depict the AVQI based severity of dysphonia. For the study, 163 individuals in normophonic and 134 individuals in dysphonic group were considered in the age range of 18-40 years. All participants were native speakers of Kannada language. The sustained vowel /a/ and reading of standard Kannada passage were considered as stimuli for extracting AVQI analysed using AVQI script version 02.03. The AVQI cut-off values obtained were 2.50 (AROC=0.894; Sensitivity= 84.7%; Specificity= 83.1%), 4.17 (AROC=0.953; Sensitivity= 84.4%; Specificity= 88.5%) and 6.23 (AROC=1.000; Sensitivity= 100%; Specificity= 100%) for normal vs. mild, mild vs. moderate and moderate vs. severe respectively. A user friendly application was developed which provides a simplified output for AVQI cut-off values which can be comprehendible by patients with voice disorder/ non-professionals and health professionals.

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


        • 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: 540-555
        • Hillenbrand J
        • Cleveland RA
        • Erickson RL
        Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1994; 37: 769-778
        • Hillenbrand J
        • Houde RA
        Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality: dysphonic voices and continuous speech.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1996; 39: 311-321
        • Parsa V
        • Jamieson DG
        Acoustic discrimination of pathological voice: sustained vowels versus continuous speech.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2001; 44: 327-339
      1. Maryn, Y.De acoustic voice quality index in het programma praat: een praktische handleiding. Belsele: Vlaamse Vereniging voor Logopedisten; 2013

        • 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: 161-174
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y
        The improvement of internal consistency of the acoustic voice quality index.
        Am J Otolaryngol. 2015; 36: 647-656
        • Barsties B
        • Maryn Y
        External validation of the acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 with extended representativity.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2016; 125: 571-583
        • Faham M
        • Laukkanen AM
        • Ikävalko T
        • et al.
        Acoustic voice quality index as a potential tool for voice screening.
        J Voice. 2019;
        • 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: 34-41
        • Pebbili GK
        • 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; 31: 125.e1-125.e6
        • 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;
        • Shabnam S
        • Mariswamy P
        Acoustic voice quality index for discriminating across normal and different vocal pathological conditions.
        J All India Inst Speech Hear. 2019; 38: 16-25
        • Koufman JA
        • Blalock PD
        Functional voice disorders.
        Otolaryngology Clinical North America. 1991; 24: 1059-1073
      2. Shasidhar KN. “Voice Kannada passage” developed as a part of unpublished master's dissertation titled “analysis of speech of stutterers” submitted to university of Mysore, Mysore, India; 1984.

      3. Boersma P, Weenink D. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 6.1.03) [Computer program]. 2019.

      4. Gupta, A & Pushpavathi M (2009). Reliability of perceptual evaluation of voice using CAPE-V rating scale in Indian Context. Student Research at AIISH, Vol.VII, Part-B, SLP (pp.17-33). 2009. AIISH publication, Mysore.

        • Youden WJ
        Index for rating diagnostic tests.
        Cancer. 1950; 3: 32-35
        • Perkins NJ
        • Schisterman EF
        The inconsistency of “optimal” cutpoints obtained using two criteria based on the receiver operating characteristic curve.
        Am J Epidemiol. 2006; 163: 670-675
        • Awan SN
        • Roy N
        • Zhang D
        • et al.
        Validation of the cepstral spectral index of dysphonia (CSID) as a screening tool for voice disorders: development of clinical cutoff scores.
        J Voice. 2016; 30: 130-144
        • 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.e7
        • 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.e11
        • 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.e9
        • Kankare E
        • Barsties V
        • Latoszek B
        • et al.
        The acoustic voice quality index version 02.02 in the Finnish-speaking population.
        Logop Phoniatr Vocology. 2020; 45: 49-56
        • 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; (In press)
        • 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; (In press)