MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210724237 · doi:10.1044/2021_jslhr-21-00123

Co-Occurrence of Hypernasality and Voice Impairment in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Acoustic Quantification

2021· article· en· W3210724237 on OpenAlexaff
Marziye Eshghi, Kathryn P. Connaghan, Sarah E. Gutz, James D. Berry, Yana Yunusova, Jordan R. Green

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
KeywordsAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisAudiologyDysarthriaMedicinePhonationPsychologyDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Hypernasality and atypical voice characteristics are common features of dysarthric speech due to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Existing acoustic measures have been developed to primarily target either hypernasality or voice impairment, and the effects of co-occurring hypernasality-voice problems on these measures are unknown. This report explores (a) the extent to which acoustic measures are affected by concurrent perceptually identified hypernasality and voice impairment due to ALS and (b) candidate acoustic measures of early indicators of hypernasality and voice impairment in the presence of multisystem involvement in individuals with ALS. METHOD: = 27). The samples were stratified based on perceptual ratings: voice/hypernasality asymptomatic, predominantly hypernasal, predominantly voice impairment, and mixed (co-occurring hypernasality and voice impairment). Groups were compared using established acoustic measures of hypernasality (one-third octave analysis) and voice (cepstral/spectral analysis) impairment. RESULTS: The one-third octave analysis differentiated all groups; the cepstral peak prominence differentiated all groups except asymptomatic versus mixed, whereas the low-to-high spectral ratio did not differ among groups. Additionally, one-third octave analyses demonstrated promising speech diagnostic potential. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the need to consider the validity of measures in the context of multisubsystem involvement. Our preliminary findings further suggest that the one-third octave analysis may be an optimal approach to quantify hypernasality and voice abnormalities in the presence of multisystem speech impairment. Future evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of the one-third octave analysis is warranted.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Speech Language and Hearing ResearchSame topicVoice and Speech DisordersFrench-language works237,207