Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Dysphonia: A Comparison Between Narrow and Broad Terminology Systems

Publication date: Available online 9 August 2017
Source:Journal of Voice
Author(s): Jenny Iwarsson, Anne Bingen-Jakobsen, Ditte Søbæk Johansen, Inge Ernst Kølle, Solveig Gunvor Pedersen, Stine Løvind Thorsen, Niels Reinholt Petersen
ObjectiveIn auditory-perceptual voice analysis, a multiparameter approach and a more reductionist approach may be compared with narrow and broad phonetic transcription and used interchangeably, depending on the purpose. The aim of this study was to investigate the perspectives of a translation of the terminology used in the multiparameter Danish Dysphonia Assessment (DDA) approach into the five-parameter GRBAS system.MethodsVoice samples illustrating type and grade of the voice qualities included in DDA were rated by five speech language pathologists using the GRBAS system with the aim of estimating inter- and intrarater reliability. The same samples were then rated using the DDA terminology.ResultsBoth inter- and intrarater reliability were found to be very high for the GRBAS parameters grade, rough, and breathy, but somewhat lower for asthenic and strained. Further, strong and clear associations were found between the DDA and GRBAS rating for grade, rough, breathy, and strained, whereas the relation between DDA ratings and asthenic was weaker and less clear.ConclusionThe data strongly support that the DDA system can be translated into the GRBAS system for auditory-perceptual voice analysis. The consensus discussion prior to the listening test is believed to have contributed to the high degree of inter- and intrarater reliability. We suggest for future use of the GRBAS system that rater reliability for asthenic and strained can increase, if these parameters are defined as behavioral terms and antagonists, reflecting muscular hypo- and hyperfunction.



from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2vmjvd4
via IFTTT