![]() Recorded samples were analyzed in terms of their acoustic characteristics using Praat software (doing phonetics by computer ). Recordings of sustained productions of /e/, /i/, and /u/ as well as words with selected consonants in medial positions were done. These selected subjects were age matched with the subjects from group I. Group II was comprised of 15 school going children (5 to 11 years, average age 6.9 years) with normal hearing sensitivity. Prior to implantation, subjects used analog behind the ear hearing aids while prior and post implantation they had received at least one year of intervention (aural/oral). Selected subjects were within age range between 5 to 11 years (average age, 7.5 years) and had received implants between the ages of 4 to 10 years (average age, 5.2 years). Group I was comprised of 15 children with prelingual bilateral severe to profound hearing loss. The subjects were divided into two groups. In India there are more than 10,000 cochlear implantees.Ī total of 30 subjects with ages ranging between 5 to 11 years participated in the study. Use of cochlear implants has been a turning point in the life of hearing impaired children enabling them to participate in the world of sounds. Many parents in India are now opting for cochlear implants for their hearing impaired children. From these figures offering insight to the large number of children having hearing loss, it is evident how needs of services related to habilitation/speech language intervention as hearing is an extremely important sensory mode to develop and use verbal language. ![]() The number of individuals with moderate hearing impairment was 90 per 100,000 persons among rural communities and 84 per 100,000 persons in urban communities. The count of individuals with severe hearing impairment was 123 per 100,000 persons in rural areas and about 113 per 100,000 persons in urban areas. Conclusion: Based on the literature and the proportional relationships and differences between the two systems and programs under consideration in this study, one can state that one can hardly compare frequency perturbation outcomes across systems and programs and amplitude perturbation outcomes across systems.According to the Indian National Sample Survey Organization's 2002 survey (NSSO) in the 58th round, the estimated number of individuals (above 5 years of age) with a profound hearing impairment was 96 per 100,000 persons in rural areas and 92 per 100,000 persons in urban areas. Furthermore, correlation analyses show weak to moderate proportional relationships between the two systems and weak to strong proportional relationships between the two programs. Results: Results indicate statistically significant differences between the two systems and programs, with the Multi-Dimensional Voice Program yielding consistently higher measures than Praat. Methods: Correlations and inferential statistics for seven perturbation measures (absolute jitter, percent jitter, relative average perturbation, pitch perturbation quotient, shimmer in decibels, percent shimmer, and amplitude perturbation quotient) in 50 subjects with various voice disorders are presented. ![]() In the present study, perturbation measures provided by two computer systems (a purpose-built professional voice analysis apparatus and a personal computer-based system for acoustic voice assessment) and two computer programs (Multi-Dimensional Voice Program and Praat) were compared. The assessment of voice perturbation is influenced by several factors, including the type of recording equipment used and the measurement extraction algorithm applied. Background/Aims: Frequency and amplitude perturbations are inherent in voice acoustic signals. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |