NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
ObjectivesThe purpose of this pilot study was to examine voice quality changes in individuals with early-stage Parkinson's disease (PD) utilizing the Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) and Acoustic Breathiness Index (ABI) over approximately a 1-year period.Study designFollow-up study.MethodsBaseline and follow-up data were gathered from the PDSTUlong speech corpus. The data for both time points included: speaker background information, sustained vowels, reading samples, and measures of PD severity (Hoehn and Yahr scores and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale III scores [UPDRS-III]). All speakers (N = 12) were native Finnish speakers. AVQIv03.01 and ABI analysis were completed in VOXplot v2.0.1. Changes in AVQI and ABI scores between baseline and follow-up were examined via causal analysis. Further, AVQI and ABI were analyzed in relation to measures of PD severity.ResultsBaseline mean AVQI score was 1.79 (range 0.14-4.83, SD=1.60), whereas follow-up mean AVQI score was 2.25 (range 0.55-4.53, SD=1.36). Baseline mean ABI score, in turn, was 2.92 (range 1-27 - 5.31, SD=1.57), whereas follow-up mean ABI score was 3.42 (range 1.40-5.40, SD=1.38). A significant difference was found between baseline and follow-up measures for both AVQI (Z = -2.002, P = 0.045) and ABI (Z = -2.197, P = 0.028). A significant difference in smoothed cepstral peak prominence (Z = -2.118, P = 0.034) and harmonics-to-noise ratio (Z = -1.961, P = 0.050) was also found between the two measurement periods. Change in AVQI and ABI were not correlated with the change in measures of PD severity.ConclusionOver approximately 1-year, a statistical change was observed in AVQI and ABI scores, even in such a small dataset. The specific qualities of breathiness and hoarseness showed the most significant progression. Changes in voice quality were more prominent in ABI analysis.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.