Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The reliability of three perceptual evaluation scales for dysphonia

  • Laryngology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology and Head & Neck Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Perceptual rating scales are widely used in voice quality assessment, yet apart from the GRBAS scale, their reliability has been poorly demonstrated. There are no studies that have compared the optimal reliability of experienced judges using different auditory rating scales in a controlled experimental environment. This study aimed to assess the reliability of three common scales (The Buffalo Voice Profile , The Vocal Profile Analysis Scheme (VPA) and GRBAS. Sixty-five varyingly dysphonic and five normal voices were recorded onto CD in random order. Thirty voices were recorded twice. Seven experienced and trained speech and language therapists rated all voices on the three scales. Only the overall grade was found to be reliable for the Buffalo Voice Profile. The reliability of the VPA scheme was found to be poor to moderate. The VPA may have a use as a multi-dimensional and in-depth evaluation of voice types, but its greater scope is at the expense of reliability. The GRBAS was reliable across all parameters except Strain. Our detailed reliability analysis comparing performance of three commonly used rating scales provides further evidence to support the GRBAS as a simple reliable measure for clinical use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Altman G (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall

  2. Carding P, Carlson E, Epstein R, Mathieson L, Shewell C (2000) Formal perceptual evaluation of voice quality in the United Kingdom. Log Phon Vocol 25:133–138

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. De Bodt MS, Heyning VD, et al (1996) The perceptual evaluation of voice disorders. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 50:283–291

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. De Bodt MS, Wuyts FL, Van de Heyning PH, Croux C (1997) Test-retest study of the GRBAS scale: influence of experience and professional background on perceptual ratings of voice quality. J Voice 11:74–80

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dejonckere PH, Obbens C, de Moor GM, Wieneke GH (1993) Perceptual evaluation of dysphonia: reliability and relevance. Folia Phonair 45:76–83

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dejonckere PH (1995) Principal components in voice pathology. Voice 4:96–105

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dejonckere P, Lebacq J (1996) Acoustic, perceptual, aerodynamic and anatomical correlations in voice pathology. ORL 58:326–332

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dejonckere P,Remacle M (1996) Differentiated perceptual evaluation of pathological voice quality: reliability and correlations with acoustic measurements. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol 117:219–224

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dejonckere P, Remacle M (1998) Reliability and clinical relevance of perceptual evaluation of pathological voices. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol 119:247–248

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dejonckere P, Lebacq J (2001) Plasticity of voice quality: a prognostic factor outcome of voice therapy. J Voice 15:251–256

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fairbanks G (1960) Voice and articulation drillbook. Harper Row, New York

  12. Gerratt R, Kreiman J, et al (1993) Comparing internal and external standards in voice quality judgments. J Speech Hear Res 36:14–20

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hammarberg B, Fritzell B, Gauffin J, Sundberg J (1986) Acoustic and perceptual analysis of vocal dysfunction. J Phon 14:533–547

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hirano M (1981) Clinical examination of voice. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  15. Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Kempster GB, Erman A, Berke GS (1993) Perceptual evaluation of voice quality: review, tutorial and a framework for future research.” J Speech Hear Res 36:21–40

  16. Laver J, Wirz S, MacKenzie J, Hiller H (1981) A perceptual protocol for the analysis of vocal profiles. University of Edinburgh, pp 265–280

  17. Orlikoff R, Dejonckere P, Dembowski A, Fitch R (1999) The perceived role of voice perception in clinical practice. Phonoscope 2:89–106

    Google Scholar 

  18. Shrout P, Fleiss J (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86:420–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Thompson W, Walter S (1988) A reappraisal of the kappa coefficient. J Clin Epidemiol 41:949–958

    Google Scholar 

  20. Uebersax J (2001) Kappa coefficients: a critical appraisal. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jsuebersax/kappa.htm

  21. Wilson D (1987) Voice problems of vhildren. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore

  22. Wuyts FL, De Bodt MS, Van de Heyning PH (1999) Is the reliability of a visual analog scale higher than an ordinal scale? An experiment with the GRBAS Scale for the perceptual evaluation of dysphonia. J Voice 13:508–517

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

    A. L. Webb, P. N. Carding, N. Steen & J. A. Wilson

  2. University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    I. J. Deary

  3. University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    K. MacKenzie

  4. Department of Speech and Voice, Freeman University Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE7 7DN, UK

    P. N. Carding

Authors
  1. A. L. Webb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. N. Carding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. I. J. Deary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. MacKenzie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. N. Steen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. A. Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. N. Carding.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Webb, A.L., Carding, P.N., Deary, I.J. et al. The reliability of three perceptual evaluation scales for dysphonia. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 261, 429–434 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-003-0707-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-003-0707-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation