General Voice Assessment

M. Brockmann-Bauser, J. E. Bohlender, and D. D. Mehta, “Acoustic perturbation measures improve with increasing vocal intensity in healthy and pathological voices,” Proceedings of the Voice Foundation Symposium, 2016.
O. Murton, et al., “Impact of congestive heart failure on voice and speech production: A pilot study,” Proceedings of the Annual Scientific Meeting of the Heart Failure Society of America, 2016. Poster
R. E. Hillman, D. Mehta, C. Stepp, J. Van Stan, and M. Zanartu, “Objective assessment of vocal hyperfunction,” Proceedings of The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, vol. 139, pp. 2193-2194, 2016.
N. Roy, et al., “Evidence-based clinical voice assessment: A systematic review,” American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, vol. 22, pp. 212-226, 2013. Publisher's VersionAbstract

PurposeTo determine what research evidence exists to support the use of voice measures in the clinical assessment of patients with voice disorders. MethodThe American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) National Center for Evidence-Based Practice in Communication Disorders staff searched 29 databases for peer-reviewed English-language articles between January 1930 and April 2009 that included key words pertaining to objective and subjective voice measures, voice disorders, and diagnostic accuracy. The identified articles were systematically assessed by an ASHA-appointed committee employing a modification of the critical appraisal of diagnostic evidence rating system. ResultsOne hundred articles met the search criteria. The majority of studies investigated acoustic measures (60%) and focused on how well a test method identified the presence or absence of a voice disorder (78%). Only 17 of the 100 articles were judged to contain adequate evidence for the measures studied to be formally considered for inclusion in clinical voice assessment. ConclusionResults provide evidence for selected acoustic, laryngeal imaging-based, auditory-perceptual, functional, and aerodynamic measures to be used as effective components in a clinical voice evaluation. However, there is clearly a pressing need for further high-quality research to produce sufficient evidence on which to recommend a comprehensive set of methods for a standard clinical voice evaluation.

R. E. Hillman, et al., “Future directions in the development of ambulatory monitoring for clinical voice assessment,” Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Advances in Quantitative Laryngology, Voice and Speech Research, 2013.
M. Ghassemi, et al., “Detecting voice modes for vocal hyperfunction prevention,” Proceedings of the 7th Annual Workshop for Women in Machine Learning. 2012.
D. D. Mehta and R. E. Hillman, “The evolution of methods for imaging vocal fold phonatory function,” Perspectives on Speech Science and Orofacial Disorders, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 5-13, 2012. Publisher's VersionAbstract

In this article, we provide a brief summary of the major technological advances that led to current methods for imaging vocal fold vibration during phonation including the development of indirect laryngoscopy, imaging of rapid motion, fiber optics, and digital image capture. We also provide a brief overview of new emerging technologies that could be used in the future for voice research and clinical voice assessment, including advances in laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy, depth-kymography, and dynamic optical coherence tomography.

M. Döllinger, J. B. Kobler, D. A. Berry, D. D. Mehta, G. Luegmair, and C. Bohr, “Experiments on analysing voice production: Excised (human, animal) and in vivo (animal) approaches,” Current Bioinformatics, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 286-304, 2011. Publisher's Version Paper
D. D. Mehta and R. E. Hillman, “Voice assessment: Updates on perceptual, acoustic, aerodynamic, and endoscopic imaging methods,” Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery, vol. 16, pp. 211-215, 2008. Publisher's VersionAbstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper describes recent advances in perceptual, acoustic, aerodynamic, and endoscopic imaging methods for assessing voice function. RECENT FINDINGS: We review advances from four major areas. PERCEPTUAL ASSESSMENT: Speech-language pathologists are being encouraged to use the new consensus auditory-perceptual evaluation of voice inventory for auditory-perceptual assessment of voice quality, and recent studies have provided new insights into listener reliability issues that have plagued subjective perceptual judgments of voice quality. ACOUSTIC ASSESSMENT: Progress is being made on the development of algorithms that are more robust for analyzing disordered voices, including the capability to extract voice quality-related measures from running speech segments. AERODYNAMIC ASSESSMENT: New devices for measuring phonation threshold air pressures and air flows have the potential to serve as sensitive indices of glottal phonatory conditions, and recent developments in aeroacoustic theory may provide new insights into laryngeal sound production mechanisms. ENDOSCOPIC IMAGING: The increased light sensitivity of new ultra high-speed color digital video processors is enabling high-quality endoscopic imaging of vocal fold tissue motion at unprecedented image capture rates, which promises to provide new insights into the mechanisms of normal and disordered voice production. SUMMARY: Some of the recent research advances in voice function assessment could be more readily adopted into clinical practice, whereas others will require further development.

D. Mehta and R. E. Hillman, “Use of aerodynamic measures in clinical voice assessment,” Perspectives on Voice and Voice Disorders, vol. 17, pp. 14-18, 2007. Paper