CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2Stuttering Research and TreatmentVoice and Speech DisordersObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Relative contributions to overall impact of stuttering in adults using the overall assessment of the Speaker’s Experience of Stuttering (OASES)

Briley, Patrick M., Wright, Heather Harris, O’Brien, Kevin, Ellis, Charles·2020·Journal of Fluency Disorders
DOI 10.1016/j.jfludis.2020.105775
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose Comprehensive assessment of stuttering requires consideration of a wide range of behaviors that impact outcomes, and the Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering (OASES) is an assessment tool that accomplishes such. The purpose of this study was to determine how the individual components of the test contribute to the OASES' impact score.Method Data collected at a university speech-language and hearing clinic from 29 adults were used for a relative weight analysis (RWA). RWA was utilized to determine the relative contributions of the OASES' subtests to the OASES' impact score. Confidence intervals for the individual relative weights were calculated for each OASES subtest and significance tests based on bootstrapping with 10,000 replications.Results Differences were present in contributions of the OASES' subtests to the OASES' overall impact score, where the following explained a significant amount of variance in the OASES' impact score: Speaker's Reactions; Daily Communication; and Quality of Life. However, contribution of the subtest, "General Information", was not significant.Conclusion Through examination of relative contributions to the impact of stuttering using the OASES, this project has identified differences in contributors to the overall impact of the disorder of stuttering. This information is beneficial to researchers and clinicians alike in that it gives specific guidance into what determines increased impact in adults who stutter (AWS). Future works should pursue clarification of these differences with an end goal of identifying and overcoming barriers to positive outcomes while also identifying and nurturing facilitators to optimal management.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jfludis.2020.105775

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Yaruss, 2016, Overall Assessment of the Speaker’s Experience of Stuttering (OASES-A) [Assessment instrument], McKinney, TX; Stuttering Therapy Resources, Inc.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Briley, P. M., Wright, H. H., O’Brien, K., & Ellis, C.
Affiliations
East Carolina University (US)
Corresponding author
Briley, Patrick M.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Fluency Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
65
Pages
105775
ISSN
0094-730X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jfludis.2020.105775
OpenAlex
W3034595339
Cited by
2
References
27
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Fluency Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Stuttering Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Voice and Speech Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Keywords
stuttering, adults who stutter, oases, relative weight analysis, quality of life, everyday communication, speech and language assessment
MeSH terms
Adult, Communication, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stuttering

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review