Significance of analysis window size in maximum flow declination rate

Abstract

Most acoustic stability measures and aerodynamic measures have recommended data analysis methods to ensure accurate comparison across research studies. Although standard aerodynamic analysis methods exist for subglottal pressure and mean transglottal flow, such standards do not exist for maximum flow declination rate (MFDR). As such, it becomes difficult to compare results across studies with the wide range of analysis windows. Because MFDR is a strong indicator of laryngeal function and increasingly is being reported in aerodynamic studies, it is necessary to determine whether a significant difference exists between analysis windows in data management. This study finds significant differences in MFDR with comparison of four different data extraction methods on the same data set. The contrasting data extractions compare differences between method A (MFDR from entire 1000-ms segment, excluding onset/offset), method B (MFDR from middle 100 ms with center at midportion of entire segment), method C (MFDR from middle 100 ms with center at midportion of maximum MFDR value from entire segment), and method D (MFDR from 20 consecutive cycles with center at midportion of maximum MFDR value from entire segment) for a sustained 7-syllable /pa/ repetition at two fundamental frequencies.