Cross-sectional validation study assesses acoustic voice quality indices in a web platform, suggesting effective online analysis tools.
Objectives.To evaluate whether established multiparametric acoustic voice quality indices, namely, the acoustic voice quality index (AVQI), acoustic breathiness index (ABI), cepstral spectral index of dysphonia (CSID), and smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS), retain their concurrent validity with expert perceptual ratings when deployed through a free, web-based analysis platform.Study design.Cross-sectional validation study using a publicly available voice database.Methods.Voice samples from 290 speakers in the Perceptual Voice Qualities Database were analyzed using PhonaLab, a free web-based platform that implements these indices via Parselmouth (a Python interface to Praat).Sustained vowels and connected speech (consensus auditory-perceptual evaluation of voice [CAPE-V] sentences) were processed to extract AVQI, ABI, CSID, CPPS, and related parameters.Algorithm agreement with desktop Praat was assessed using Pearson correlations and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).Spearman correlations with CAPE-V and GRBAS perceptual ratings were calculated.Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed as a secondary, exploratory analysis.Results.Algorithm agreement between PhonaLab and desktop Praat was strong to excellent (r 0.96, ICC 0. 94 for all primary indices).Correlations between acoustic indices and perceptual ratings were consistent with published validation studies: AVQI with CAPE-V Overall Severity (r s = 0.73) and GRBAS (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain) Grade (r s = 0.75); ABI with CAPE-V Breathiness (r s = 0.75); CSID with GRBAS Grade (r s = 0.68); CPPS from sustained vowels with CAPE-V Breathiness (r s = -0.69).DeLong tests showed that ABI significantly outperformed single parameters for breathiness detection (P < 0.001).Conclusions.Validated multiparametric acoustic indices retain their established concurrent validity with perceptual ratings when deployed through PhonaLab's web-based environment, supporting the feasibility of delivering research-validated acoustic analysis through browser-based platforms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jorge C. Lucero (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: