CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Voice and Speech DisordersPhonetics and Phonology ResearchDysphagia Assessment and Management

Changes to articulation following LSVT® and traditional dysarthria therapy in non-progressive dysarthria

Wenke, Rachel J., Cornwell, Petrea, Theodoros, Deborah G.·2010·International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
DOI 10.3109/17549500903568468
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The present study aimed to evaluate the effects of the Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT(R)) on acoustic and perceptual measures of articulation in non-progressive dysarthria in comparison to traditional dysarthria therapy. The study involved 26 individuals with non-progressive dysarthria who were randomly allocated to receive either LSVT(R) or traditional dysarthria therapy (TRAD), both of which were administered for 16 hourly sessions over 4 weeks. Participants' speech samples were collected over a total of six testing sessions during three assessment phases: (1) prior to treatment, (2) immediately post-treatment, and (3) 6 months post-treatment (FU). Speech samples were analysed perceptually to determine articulatory precision and intelligibility as well as acoustically using vowel space (and vowel formant measures) and first moment differences. Results revealed short and long-term significant increases in vowel space area following LSVT(R). Significantly increased intelligibility was also found at FU in the LSVT(R) group. No significant differences between groups for any variables were found. The study reveals that LSVT(R) may be a suitable treatment option for improving vowel articulation and subsequent intelligibility in some individuals with non-progressive dysarthria.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/17549500903568468

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 56 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wenke, R. J., Cornwell, P., & Theodoros, D. G.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Theodoros, Deborah G.
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2010-03-30
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
203-220
ISSN
  • 1441-7049 (ISSN-L)
  • 1754-9507
  • 1754-9515
DOI
10.3109/17549500903568468
OpenAlex
W2088466360
Cited by
48
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Dysphagia Assessment and Management
Keywords
Lee Silverman Voice Treatment, articulation therapy, vowel space, vowel formants, speech intelligibility, articulatory precision
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Dysarthria, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Phonetics, Speech, Speech Acoustics, Speech Articulation Tests, Speech Intelligibility, Time Factors, Voice Training, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

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