Pommée Timothy, Balaguer Mathieu, Mauclair Julie, Pinquier Julien, Woisard Virginie
IRIT, CNRS, Paul Sabatier University Toulouse III, Toulouse, France.
ENT Department, University Hospital of Toulouse Larrey, Toulouse, France.
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2022 Jan;57(1):21-41. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12672. Epub 2021 Sep 24.
Intelligibility and comprehensibility in speech disorders can be assessed both perceptually and instrumentally, but a lack of consensus exists regarding the terminology and related speech measures in both the clinical and scientific fields.
To draw up a more consensual definition of intelligibility and comprehensibility and to define which assessment methods relate to both concepts, as part of their definition.
METHODS & PROCEDURES: A three-round modified Delphi consensus study was carried out among clinicians, researchers and lecturers engaged in activities in speech disorders.
OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Forty international experts from different fields (mainly clinicians, linguists and computer scientists) participated in the elaboration of a comprehensive definition of intelligibility and comprehensibility and their assessment. While both concepts are linked and contribute to functional human communication, they relate to two different reconstruction levels of the transmitted speech material. Intelligibility refers to the acoustic-phonetic decoding of the utterance, while comprehensibility relates to the reconstruction of the meaning of the message. Consequently, the perceptual assessment of intelligibility requires the use of unpredictable speech material (pseudo-words, minimal word pairs, unpredictable sentences), whereas comprehensibility assessment is meaning and context related and entails more functional speech stimuli and tasks.
CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS: This consensus study provides the scientific and clinical communities with a better understanding of intelligibility and comprehensibility. A comprehensive definition was drafted, including specifications regarding the tasks that best fit their assessment. The outcome has implications for both clinical practice and scientific research, as the disambiguation improves communication between professionals and thereby increases the efficiency of patient assessment and care and benefits the progress of research as well as research translation.
What is already known on the subject Intelligibility and comprehensibility in speech disorders can be assessed both perceptually and instrumentally, but a lack of consensus exists regarding the terminology and related speech measures in both the clinical and scientific fields. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This consensus study allowed for a more consensual and comprehensive definition of intelligibility and comprehensibility and their assessment, for clinicians and researchers. The terminological disambiguation helps to improve communication between experts in the field of speech disorders and thereby benefits the progress of research as well as research translation. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Unambiguous communication between professionals, for example, in a multidisciplinary team, allows for the improvement in the efficiency of patient care. Furthermore, this study allowed the assessment tasks that best fit the definition of both intelligibility and comprehensibility to be specified, thereby providing valuable information to improve speech disorder assessment and its standardization.
言语障碍中的可懂度和可理解度既可以通过感知方式评估，也可以借助仪器进行评估，但在临床和科学领域，关于术语及相关言语测量方法缺乏共识。
制定一个更具共识性的可懂度和可理解度定义，并确定在其定义范畴内与这两个概念相关的评估方法。
对从事言语障碍相关活动的临床医生、研究人员和讲师开展了三轮改进的德尔菲共识研究。
来自不同领域的40位国际专家（主要是临床医生、语言学家和计算机科学家）参与了可懂度和可理解度及其评估的综合定义的制定。虽然这两个概念相互关联且对人类功能性交流有贡献，但它们涉及所传递言语材料的两个不同重建层面。可懂度指话语的声学语音解码，而可理解度与信息意义的重建有关。因此，可懂度的感知评估需要使用不可预测的言语材料（伪词、最小词对、不可预测的句子），而可理解度评估与意义和语境相关，需要更多功能性言语刺激和任务。
这项共识研究使科学界和临床界对可懂度和可理解度有了更好的理解。起草了一个综合定义，包括最适合其评估的任务的具体说明。这一结果对临床实践和科学研究都有影响，因为消除歧义改善了专业人员之间的沟通，从而提高了患者评估和护理的效率，也有利于研究进展和研究成果转化。
关于该主题已知的情况 言语障碍中的可懂度和可理解度既可以通过感知方式评估，也可以借助仪器进行评估，但在临床和科学领域，关于术语及相关言语测量方法缺乏共识。本文对现有知识的补充 这项共识研究为临床医生和研究人员提供了一个更具共识性和综合性的可懂度和可理解度及其评估的定义。术语的明确有助于改善言语障碍领域专家之间的沟通，从而有利于研究进展和研究成果转化。这项工作的潜在或实际临床意义是什么？例如，在多学科团队中，专业人员之间清晰无误的沟通有助于提高患者护理效率。此外，这项研究确定了最符合可懂度和可理解度定义的评估任务，从而为改进言语障碍评估及其标准化提供了有价值的信息。
