A Comparison of Acoustic Measurements Using Wired and Wireless Microphones for Smartphone Recordings in Adults with Dysphonia

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the acoustic measurements of various external microphones, differing in price range and connection type, used for smartphone-based voice analysis with those derived from Computerized Speech Lab (CSL) and to evaluate their utility as screening tools for voice disorders.Methods: 29 adults with dysphonia and 31 adults without dysphonia participated in the study. The study used one high-end and one low-end wired and wireless microphone each to simultaneously record vowel phonation tasks and connected speech tasks. Acoustic measurements, including F0, Jitt, Shim, NHR, CPP in vowels and sentences, SR, and their standard deviations were analyzed. Additionally, multivariable voice indices such as Cepstral Spectral Index of Dysphonia (CSID), Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI), Acoustic Psychometric Severity Index of Dysphonia (APSID), and Comprehensive Index of Vocal Fatigue (CIVF) were also analyzed. Results: Except for F0, significant differences were noted between CSL and other devices. Interaction effects between group and microphone type were observed for Shim, CPPv, σCPPs, and AVQI. Positive correlations were found across all devices, with most measurements showing moderate to strong correlations and reliability, except for SRs and σSRs. Diagnostic utility showed no significant AUC differences for most metrics except Jitt, Shim, and CSIDv. Conclusion: Despite device-related measurement differences, most metrics demonstrated strong correlations and high reliability with the CSL-based measurements, supporting the feasibility of using external microphones for voice disorder screening. High-quality wired or wireless microphones are recommended for voice assessment using smartphone recordings, as the choice of microphone may vary depending on the specific parameters being measured.