{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03366174055829228, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009852216748768473, 'mean_word_length': 5.589189189189189, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Student Research Award 1999: Comparative Contrast of Voice Measurements

Currently, a variety of objective and subjective measures are available to describe voice and voice function. Despite these various tools, there is no standard measure of voice function that incorporates both objective and subjective measures. The goal of this research was to study the relationship between objective, subjective, and patient-based measures of voice function. Objective voice function was measured with 4 laboratory-based parameters (sub-glottic pressure, airflow at the lips, maximum phonation time, and vocal efficiency), subjective function with the GRBAS (grade, rough, breathy, asthenic, strained) scale, and patient-based function according to an overall global rating of quality. The objective and subjective measures were significantly related to each other (P < 0.05); the objective and patient-based measures were also related (P = 0.019), but the subjective and patient-based measures were not related. We demonstrate a significant relationship between some but not all measures of voice function. We believe that subjective measures provide additional valuable information not obtained from objective measures alone.