Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose: Cepstral analysis has become a widely recommended acoustic tool for voice assessment, yet its computational principles and clinical interpretation often remain unclear, particularly for nontechnical users. This review aims to present the concepts, methodological considerations, and clinical applications of cepstral analysis in a simplified and accessible format for voice clinicians, educators, students, and researchers. Method: This narrative review is organized into two sections. The first introduces the theoretical foundations of cepstral analysis, highlighting its advantages over traditional perturbation measures, including its independence from fundamental frequency extraction and greater stability across voice types. Key parameter settings for the widely used Praat software are also outlined. The second section synthesizes available peer-reviewed studies and technical guidelines, categorizing empirical findings across multiple application domains. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple scientific databases using defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify relevant studies. Where available, cutoff and normative values for cepstral measures are provided to guide clinical use and interpretation. Conclusion: This review offers a structured reference for clinicians, educators, and researchers, aiming to enhance consistent use of cepstral measures in voice assessment, improve clinical decision making, and highlight the need for ongoing methodological standardization across tasks, populations, and software platforms. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.30764927
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Phadke et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: