4点GRBAS、7点GRBAS和CAPE-V在语音障碍听觉知觉评价中的比较

Q3 Medicine Audiology and Speech Research Pub Date : 2021-04-15 DOI:10.21848/ASR.200086
Seong Hee Choi, Miok Yu, Chul-Hee Choi
{"title":"4点GRBAS、7点GRBAS和CAPE-V在语音障碍听觉知觉评价中的比较","authors":"Seong Hee Choi, Miok Yu, Chul-Hee Choi","doi":"10.21848/ASR.200086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Correspondence: Seong Hee Choi, PhD Department of Audiology & SpeechLanguage Pathology, College of Bio and Medical Sciences, Research Institute of Biomimetic Sensory Control, and Catholic Hearing Voice Speech Center, Daegu Catholic University, 13-13 Hayang-ro, Hayang-eup, Gyeongsan 38430, Korea Tel: +82-53-850-2542 Fax: +82-53-359-6780 E-mail: shgrace@cu.ac.kr Purpose: The GRBAS (grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, strain) scale, a 4-point scale, has been most widely used for judging auditory-perceptual severity for dysphonia. However, in current clinical practice, sometimes a more fragmented 0.5 scheme is being used if the original GRBAS scale is ambiguous to assess. Thus, the aim of the present study was to compare the dysphonia severity using the three auditory-perceptual evaluation tools, 4-point, 7-point GRBAS scale, and CAPEV and provide the information regarding differentiation of perceptual severity and acoustic correlations. Methods: Voice samples for sustained vowel and connected speech were obtained from 101 dysphonic patients. Auditory-perceptual assessments of dysphonia severity were performed by two certified experienced speech-language pathologists specializing in voice disorders using the grade of a 4-point and a 7-point GRBAS, OS of CAPE-V and also were compared with cepstral measures [cepstrum peak prominence (CPP), low/high spectral ratio]. Results: OS and G of inter-rater reliability of dysphonia using CAPE-V and 4-point GRBAS scales were good (ICC > 0.800) while G of 7-point GRBAS was less strong (ICC > 0.681) than OS of CAPE-V and G of 4-point GRBAS scale. The highest correlation with CPP was the OS of CAPE-V in both vowel and connected speech, while L/H ratio showed low correlation with dysphonia severity. The OS of CAPE-V in vowel and connected speech differed significantly in G of both GRBAS scales. On the 4-point GRBAS scale, CPP showed only the difference between G1-G2, G2-G3 groups in /a/ vowel, whereas in the connected speech, the difference between G0-G1, G1-G2, and G2-G3 groups was relatively differentiated. Meanwhile, on a 7-point GRBAS scale, CPP showed only differences between G1.5-G2 groups in sustained vowel, while CPP showed no differences between G0-G0.5, G0.5-G1, G1-G1.5, G2-G2.5, and G2.5-G3 groups respectively in connected speech. Conclusion: 7-point GRBAS scale showed a higher correlation with CPP measures than the original GRBAS, but reduced the discrimination of dysphonia severity compared to the 4-point GRBAS scale. Consequently, modified 7-point GRBAS scale could be useful as a clinically-perceptual evaluation tool, along with the original GRBAS scale and CAPE-V.","PeriodicalId":36841,"journal":{"name":"Audiology and Speech Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparisons of 4-Point GRBAS, 7-Point-GRBAS, and CAPE-V for Auditory Perceptual Evaluation of Dysphonia\",\"authors\":\"Seong Hee Choi, Miok Yu, Chul-Hee Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.21848/ASR.200086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Correspondence: Seong Hee Choi, PhD Department of Audiology & SpeechLanguage Pathology, College of Bio and Medical Sciences, Research Institute of Biomimetic Sensory Control, and Catholic Hearing Voice Speech Center, Daegu Catholic University, 13-13 Hayang-ro, Hayang-eup, Gyeongsan 38430, Korea Tel: +82-53-850-2542 Fax: +82-53-359-6780 E-mail: shgrace@cu.ac.kr Purpose: The GRBAS (grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, strain) scale, a 4-point scale, has been most widely used for judging auditory-perceptual severity for dysphonia. However, in current clinical practice, sometimes a more fragmented 0.5 scheme is being used if the original GRBAS scale is ambiguous to assess. Thus, the aim of the present study was to compare the dysphonia severity using the three auditory-perceptual evaluation tools, 4-point, 7-point GRBAS scale, and CAPEV and provide the information regarding differentiation of perceptual severity and acoustic correlations. Methods: Voice samples for sustained vowel and connected speech were obtained from 101 dysphonic patients. Auditory-perceptual assessments of dysphonia severity were performed by two certified experienced speech-language pathologists specializing in voice disorders using the grade of a 4-point and a 7-point GRBAS, OS of CAPE-V and also were compared with cepstral measures [cepstrum peak prominence (CPP), low/high spectral ratio]. Results: OS and G of inter-rater reliability of dysphonia using CAPE-V and 4-point GRBAS scales were good (ICC > 0.800) while G of 7-point GRBAS was less strong (ICC > 0.681) than OS of CAPE-V and G of 4-point GRBAS scale. The highest correlation with CPP was the OS of CAPE-V in both vowel and connected speech, while L/H ratio showed low correlation with dysphonia severity. The OS of CAPE-V in vowel and connected speech differed significantly in G of both GRBAS scales. On the 4-point GRBAS scale, CPP showed only the difference between G1-G2, G2-G3 groups in /a/ vowel, whereas in the connected speech, the difference between G0-G1, G1-G2, and G2-G3 groups was relatively differentiated. Meanwhile, on a 7-point GRBAS scale, CPP showed only differences between G1.5-G2 groups in sustained vowel, while CPP showed no differences between G0-G0.5, G0.5-G1, G1-G1.5, G2-G2.5, and G2.5-G3 groups respectively in connected speech. Conclusion: 7-point GRBAS scale showed a higher correlation with CPP measures than the original GRBAS, but reduced the discrimination of dysphonia severity compared to the 4-point GRBAS scale. Consequently, modified 7-point GRBAS scale could be useful as a clinically-perceptual evaluation tool, along with the original GRBAS scale and CAPE-V.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Audiology and Speech Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Audiology and Speech Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21848/ASR.200086\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiology and Speech Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21848/ASR.200086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

通信:Seong Hee Choi博士,大邱天主教大学生物与医学学院听力学与言语语言病理学系,仿生感觉控制研究所,天主教听力语音中心,韩国庆山市海阳路13-13号,38430电话:+82-53-850-2542传真:+82-53-359-6780 E-mail: shgrace@cu.ac.kr目的:GRBAS(等级、粗糙度、呼吸、乏力、张力)量表为4分制,已被广泛用于判断语音障碍的听觉知觉严重程度。然而,在目前的临床实践中,如果最初的GRBAS量表难以评估,有时会使用更分散的0.5方案。因此,本研究的目的是使用三种听觉-知觉评估工具,即4分、7分GRBAS量表和CAPEV来比较语音障碍的严重程度,并提供关于感知严重程度和声学相关性的区分信息。方法:对101例语音障碍患者进行持续元音和连音语音采集。由两名专业从事语音障碍的经验丰富的语言病理学家使用CAPE-V的4分和7分GRBAS评分和OS评分对语音障碍的严重程度进行听觉感知评估,并与倒谱测量[倒谱峰值突出(CPP),低/高频谱比]进行比较。结果:CAPE-V和4分GRBAS量表对语音障碍的评分间信度OS和G较好(ICC > 0.800), 7分GRBAS量表的G较CAPE-V和4分GRBAS量表的OS和G弱(ICC > 0.681)。与CPP相关性最高的是元音和连音的CAPE-V OS,而L/H比与语音障碍严重程度相关性较低。在两个GRBAS量表中,CAPE-V在元音和连接语音上的OS在G上存在显著差异。在4点GRBAS量表上,CPP仅在/a/元音中显示G1-G2、G2-G3组之间的差异,而在连通语音中,G0-G1、G1-G2和G2-G3组之间的差异相对分化。同时,在7点GRBAS量表上,CPP仅在G1.5-G2组之间存在持续元音的差异,而在连接语音中,CPP在G0-G0.5、G0.5-G1、G1-G1.5、G2-G2.5和G2.5-G3组之间分别无差异。结论:与原GRBAS量表相比,7分GRBAS量表与CPP量表的相关性更高,但与4分GRBAS量表相比,对语音障碍严重程度的区分程度降低。因此,修改后的7分GRBAS量表可以与原始GRBAS量表和CAPE-V一起作为临床感知评估工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparisons of 4-Point GRBAS, 7-Point-GRBAS, and CAPE-V for Auditory Perceptual Evaluation of Dysphonia
Correspondence: Seong Hee Choi, PhD Department of Audiology & SpeechLanguage Pathology, College of Bio and Medical Sciences, Research Institute of Biomimetic Sensory Control, and Catholic Hearing Voice Speech Center, Daegu Catholic University, 13-13 Hayang-ro, Hayang-eup, Gyeongsan 38430, Korea Tel: +82-53-850-2542 Fax: +82-53-359-6780 E-mail: shgrace@cu.ac.kr Purpose: The GRBAS (grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, strain) scale, a 4-point scale, has been most widely used for judging auditory-perceptual severity for dysphonia. However, in current clinical practice, sometimes a more fragmented 0.5 scheme is being used if the original GRBAS scale is ambiguous to assess. Thus, the aim of the present study was to compare the dysphonia severity using the three auditory-perceptual evaluation tools, 4-point, 7-point GRBAS scale, and CAPEV and provide the information regarding differentiation of perceptual severity and acoustic correlations. Methods: Voice samples for sustained vowel and connected speech were obtained from 101 dysphonic patients. Auditory-perceptual assessments of dysphonia severity were performed by two certified experienced speech-language pathologists specializing in voice disorders using the grade of a 4-point and a 7-point GRBAS, OS of CAPE-V and also were compared with cepstral measures [cepstrum peak prominence (CPP), low/high spectral ratio]. Results: OS and G of inter-rater reliability of dysphonia using CAPE-V and 4-point GRBAS scales were good (ICC > 0.800) while G of 7-point GRBAS was less strong (ICC > 0.681) than OS of CAPE-V and G of 4-point GRBAS scale. The highest correlation with CPP was the OS of CAPE-V in both vowel and connected speech, while L/H ratio showed low correlation with dysphonia severity. The OS of CAPE-V in vowel and connected speech differed significantly in G of both GRBAS scales. On the 4-point GRBAS scale, CPP showed only the difference between G1-G2, G2-G3 groups in /a/ vowel, whereas in the connected speech, the difference between G0-G1, G1-G2, and G2-G3 groups was relatively differentiated. Meanwhile, on a 7-point GRBAS scale, CPP showed only differences between G1.5-G2 groups in sustained vowel, while CPP showed no differences between G0-G0.5, G0.5-G1, G1-G1.5, G2-G2.5, and G2.5-G3 groups respectively in connected speech. Conclusion: 7-point GRBAS scale showed a higher correlation with CPP measures than the original GRBAS, but reduced the discrimination of dysphonia severity compared to the 4-point GRBAS scale. Consequently, modified 7-point GRBAS scale could be useful as a clinically-perceptual evaluation tool, along with the original GRBAS scale and CAPE-V.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Audiology and Speech Research
Audiology and Speech Research Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
Research on Effective Methodology for Hearing Impairment Rehabilitation; Based on a Diary Study for Elderly OnlineAuditory Training Self-Reported Hearing Difficulties and Hearing Aid Uptake Validity and Reliability of the Korean Version of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire in Cochlear Implant Users Research Trends According to the Speech Production Mechanism of Patients with Dysarthria Caused by Acute Brain Injury in Korea The Necessity for Auditory Training with Idiomatic Expressions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1