A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Clinical Cutoff Scores for Acoustic Indices of Vocal Hyperfunction That Combine Relative Fundamental Frequency and Cepstral Peak Prominence. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: This study examined the discriminative ability of acoustic indices of vocal hyperfunction combining smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS) and relative fundamental frequency (RFF).

Method: Demographic, CPPS, and RFF parameters were entered into logistic regression models trained on two 1:1 case-control groups: individuals with and without nonphonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction (NPVH; = 360) and phonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction (PVH; = 240). Equations from the final models were used to predict group membership in two independent test sets ( = 100 each).

Results: Both CPPS and RFF parameters significantly improved model fits for NPVH and PVH after accounting for demographics. CPPS explained unique variance beyond RFF in both models. RFF explained unique variance beyond CPPS in the PVH model. Final models included CPPS and RFF offset parameters for both NPVH and PVH; RFF onset parameters were significant only in the PVH model. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for the independent test sets revealed acceptable classification for NPVH (72%) and good classification for PVH (86%).

Conclusions: A combination of CPPS and RFF parameters showed better discriminative ability than either measure alone for PVH. Clinical cutoff scores for acoustic indices of vocal hyperfunction are proposed for assessment and screening purposes.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9499364PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/2021_JSLHR-21-00466DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

vocal hyperfunction
20
cpps rff
16
acoustic indices
12
indices vocal
12
rff parameters
12
clinical cutoff
8
cutoff scores
8
scores acoustic
8
relative fundamental
8
fundamental frequency
8

Similar Publications