Haley Katarina L, Roth Heidi, Grindstaff Enetta, Jacks Adam
Division of Speech and Hearing Sciences, CB#7190; Department of Allied Health Sciences; The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill NC 27599.
Aphasiology. 2011;25(12):1600-1620. doi: 10.1080/02687038.2011.628379.
Previous work indicates that single word intelligibility tests developed for dysarthria are sensitive to segmental production errors in aphasic individuals with and without apraxia of speech. However, potential listener learning effects and difficulties adapting elicitation procedures to coexisting language impairments limit their applicability to left hemisphere stroke survivors. AIMS: The main purpose of this study was to examine basic psychometric properties for a new monosyllabic intelligibility test developed for individuals with aphasia and/or AOS. A related purpose was to examine clinical feasibility and potential to standardize a computer-mediated administration approach. METHODS #ENTITYSTARTX00026; PROCEDURES: A 600-item monosyllabic single word intelligibility test was constructed by assembling sets of phonetically similar words. Custom software was used to select 50 target words from this test in a pseudo-random fashion and to elicit and record production of these words by 23 speakers with aphasia and 20 neurologically healthy participants. To evaluate test-retest reliability, two identical sets of 50-word lists were elicited by requesting repetition after a live speaker model. To examine the effect of a different word set and auditory model, an additional set of 50 different words was elicited with a pre-recorded model. The recorded words were presented to normal-hearing listeners for identification via orthographic and multiple-choice response formats. To examine construct validity, production accuracy for each speaker was estimated via phonetic transcription and rating of overall articulation. OUTCOMES #ENTITYSTARTX00026; RESULTS: Recording and listening tasks were completed in less than six minutes for all speakers and listeners. Aphasic speakers were significantly less intelligible than neurologically healthy speakers and displayed a wide range of intelligibility scores. Test-retest and inter-listener reliability estimates were strong. No significant difference was found in scores based on recordings from a live model versus a pre-recorded model, but some individual speakers favored the live model. Intelligibility test scores correlated highly with segmental accuracy derived from broad phonetic transcription of the same speech sample and a motor speech evaluation. Scores correlated moderately with rated articulation difficulty. CONCLUSIONS: We describe a computerized, single-word intelligibility test that yields clinically feasible, reliable, and valid measures of segmental speech production in adults with aphasia. This tool can be used in clinical research to facilitate appropriate participant selection and to establish matching across comparison groups. For a majority of speakers, elicitation procedures can be standardized by using a pre-recorded auditory model for repetition. This assessment tool has potential utility for both clinical assessment and outcomes research.
先前的研究表明,为构音障碍开发的单字可懂度测试对有或无言语失用症的失语症个体的语音片段产生错误敏感。然而,潜在的听众学习效应以及使诱发程序适应共存语言障碍的困难限制了它们在左半球中风幸存者中的适用性。目的:本研究的主要目的是检验为失语症和/或AOS个体开发的一种新的单音节可懂度测试的基本心理测量特性。一个相关目的是检验临床可行性以及标准化计算机介导给药方法的潜力。方法#实体开始X00026;程序:通过组装语音相似的单词集构建了一个600项的单音节单字可懂度测试。使用定制软件从该测试中以伪随机方式选择50个目标单词,并由23名失语症患者和20名神经功能正常的参与者诱发并记录这些单词的发音。为了评估重测信度,通过要求在现场说话者模型后重复来诱发两组相同的50个单词列表。为了检验不同单词集和听觉模型的效果,使用预先录制的模型诱发另一组50个不同的单词。将录制的单词呈现给听力正常的听众,通过正字法和多项选择反应格式进行识别。为了检验结构效度,通过语音转录和整体发音评分来估计每个说话者的发音准确性。结果#实体开始X00026;结果:所有说话者和听众的录制和听力任务在不到6分钟内完成。失语症患者的可懂度明显低于神经功能正常的患者,并且表现出广泛的可懂度得分。重测信度和听众间信度估计很强。基于现场模型与预先录制模型的录音得分没有显著差异,但一些个体说话者更喜欢现场模型。可懂度测试得分与从同一语音样本的广泛语音转录和运动言语评估得出的语音片段准确性高度相关。得分与评定的发音难度中度相关。结论:我们描述了一种计算机化的单字可懂度测试,该测试能产生临床上可行、可靠且有效的失语症成人语音片段产生的测量方法。该工具可用于临床研究,以促进适当的参与者选择并在比较组之间建立匹配。对于大多数说话者,通过使用预先录制的听觉模型进行重复,可以使诱发程序标准化。这种评估工具在临床评估和结果研究中具有潜在用途。