CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 18Voice and Speech DisordersPhonetics and Phonology ResearchLanguage Development and Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Preparing an E-learning-based Speech Therapy (EST) efficacy study: Identifying suitable outcome measures to detect within-subject changes of speech intelligibility in dysarthric speakers

Beijer, L. J., Rietveld, A. C. M., Ruiter, M. B., Geurts, A. C. H.·2014·Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics
DOI 10.3109/02699206.2014.936627
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We explored the suitability of perceptual and acoustic outcome measures to prepare E-learning based Speech Therapy (EST) efficacy tests regarding speech intelligibility in dysarthric speakers. Eight speakers with stroke (n=3), Parkinson's disease (n=4) and traumatic brain injury (n=1) participated in a 4 weeks EST trial. A repeated measures design was employed. Perceptual measures were (a) scale ratings for "ease of intelligibility" and "pleasantness" in continuous speech and (b) orthographic transcription scores of semantically unpredictable sentences. Acoustic measures were (c) "intensity during closure" (ΔIDC) in the occlusion phase of voiceless plosives, (d) changes in the vowel space of /a/, /e/ and /o/ and (e) the F0 variability in semantically unpredictable sentences. The only consistent finding concerned an increased (instead of the expected decreased) ΔIDC after EST, possibly caused by increased speech intensity without articulatory adjustments. The importance of suitable perceptual and acoustic measures for efficacy research is discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/02699206.2014.936627

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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: 37

  1. 10.1080/14427591.2014.887991 · DOI
  2. 10.1136/jnnp.54.12.1093 · DOI
  3. 10.1080/02687030544000182 · DOI
  4. Beijer, L. J., Clapham, R. P., & Rietveld, A. C. M. (2012). Evaluating the suitability of orthographic transcription and intelligibility scale rating of semantically unpredictable sentences (SUS) for speech training efficacy research in dysarthric speakers with Parkinson's disease. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 20, 17–34
  5. 10.1089/tmj.2009.0183 · DOI
  6. 10.1089/tmj.2009.0104 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2011.05.002 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/0167-6393(96)00026-X · DOI
  9. 10.1161/01.STR.0000062343.64383.D0 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1080/02699200050024001 · DOI
  11. Boersma P. (1998). Functional phonology: Formalizing the interactions between articulatory and perceptual drives. Unpublished PhD thesis University of Amsterdam the Netherlands
  12. Boves, L. (1984). The phonetic basis of perceptual ratings of running speech. Dordrecht, Holland; Cinnaminson, USA: Foris Publications · DOI
  13. 10.1044/jshr.1202.246 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1016/S0021-9924(02)00065-5 · DOI
  15. de Rue N. P. W. D. (2012). Verstaanbaarheidsmaten voor dysartrische spraak. Orthografische transcriptiescores en schaalscores van Semantically Unpredictable Sentences (SUS) als verstaanbaarheidsmaat voor dysartrische spraak als gevolg van CVA. Unpublished thesis Radboud University Nijmegen
  16. 10.1212/01.WNL.0000044480.95458.56 · DOI
  17. Hill A. (2008). The assessment of acquired neurogenic communication disorders in adults using a telerehabilitation application. PhD thesis. The University of Queensland Brisbane
  18. 10.1136/jnnp.2007.131045 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Kent, R. D., Duffy, J., Kent, J. F., Vorperian, H. K., & Thomas, J. E. (1999). Quantification of motor speech abilities in stroke: Time-energy analyses of syllable and word repetition. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 7, 83–90
  20. 10.1080/0269920031000086248 · DOI
  21. 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0020) · DOI
  22. 10.1016/S0021-9924(03)00032-7 · DOI
  23. 10.1044/jslhr.4205.1148 · DOI
  24. 10.1044/1058-0360(2008/025) · DOI
  25. Neger T. (2010). Acoustic measures of the automatic assessment of intelligibility in dysarthric speech: a case study. Unpublished thesis Radboud University Nijmegen
  26. 10.1080/14417040600970606 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Palmer, R., Enderby, P., & Cunningham, S. (2004). The effect of three practice conditions on the consistency of chronic dysarthric speech. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 12, 183–188
  28. 10.1136/jnnp.71.4.493 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Rietveld, T., & van Heuven, V. (2009). Algemene fonetiek (third edition). Bussum: Coutinho, in Dutch
  30. 10.1044/jshr.3702.347 · DOI
  31. 10.1080/01621459.1952.10501179 · DOI
  32. 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0007) · DOI
  33. 10.1016/0167-6393(93)90015-D · DOI
  34. Van de Weijer, J., & Slis, I. (1991). Nasaliteitsmeting met de nasometer. Logopedie & Foniatrie, 63, 97–101
  35. van Doremalen J. Strik H. & Cucchiarini C. (2009). Optimizing non-native speech recognition for CALL applications. Proceedings of Interspeech-2009 Brighton UK pp. 592–595 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2004.12.001 · DOI
  37. 10.1089/tmj.2004.10.200 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Beijer, L. J., Rietveld, A. C. M., Ruiter, M. B., & Geurts, A. C. H.
Affiliations
  • Sint Maartenskliniek (NL)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
Corresponding author
Beijer, L. J.
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2014-07-15
Volume
28
Issue
12
Pages
927-950
ISSN
  • 0269-9206 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5076
DOI
10.3109/02699206.2014.936627
OpenAlex
W2127678189
Cited by
18
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Voice and Speech Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
dysarthria, speech intelligibility, outcome measures, stroke, Parkinson's disease, traumatic brain injury, perceptual ratings, acoustic analysis, voiceless plosives, vowel space, fundamental frequency variability, orthographic transcription
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Brain Injuries, Dysarthria, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Parkinson Disease, Phonetics, Semantics, Speech Acoustics, Speech Intelligibility, Speech Production Measurement, Speech Therapy, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Stroke

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