PURPOSE: to check the credibility between an acoustic program, an experienced evaluator and a non-experienced evaluator measuring the Brazilian vowel /a/ in subjects with no voice complaints and to verify if there is difference between the highest value of three emissions of MPD with the average of these values. METHODS:56 adults recorded the vowel /a/ in MPD. One measurement was performed by an experienced speech pathologist and the other by a newly graduated speech pathologist, with a stop watch. A third valuator measured the MPD in an acoustic program. The difference between the average of the three emissions and the highest value of MPD obtained by each evaluator was compared. RESULTS:there was no difference between the evaluators and an acoustic program the only difference found was among considering the average of the three emissions or the highest value of MPD. CONCLUSIONS:the MPD has high reliability regardless the form of extraction and the clinical experience of the evaluator. There was a difference in the value of MPD comparing the average of three emissions with its highest value, which suggests that we should always follow the same pattern in our assessments and reassessments.
展开▼
机译：目的：检查声学程序，经验丰富的评估者和非经验评估者之间在没有语音投诉的情况下测量巴西元音/ a /的可信度，并验证三种MPD排放的最高值与这些值的平均值。方法：56名成人在MPD中记录了元音/ a /。一种测量是由经验丰富的言语病理学家进行的，而另一项则是由刚毕业的言语病理学家进行的，带有秒表。第三位评估师通过声学程序测量了MPD。比较了三种排放物的平均值与每个评估者获得的MPD最大值之间的差异。结果：评估人员和声学程序之间没有差异，唯一的差异是考虑了三种排放的平均值或MPD的最大值。结论：MPD具有高度的可靠性，无论提取形式和评估者的临床经验如何。 MPD的值存在差异，将三个排放的平均值与其最高值进行比较，这表明我们在评估和重新评估时应始终遵循相同的模式。
展开▼
