ArticleClinical linguistics & phonetics2018
Deriving individualised /r/ targets from the acoustics of children's non-rhotic vowels.
Article in Clinical linguistics & phonetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Correcting Residual Errors With Spectral, Ultrasound, and Traditional Speech Therapy: Delineation of Sensorimotor Subtypes
Correcting Residual Errors With Spectral, Ultrasound, and Traditional Speech Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Comparing Traditional and Biofeedback Treatment for Residual Speech Errors Via Telepractice
Visual-acoustic Intervention With Service Delivery In-person and Via Telepractice (VISIT) Non-Inferiority Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Selecting an acoustic correlate for automated measurement of American English rhotic production in children.International journal of speech-language pathology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In visual-acoustic biofeedback for rhotic errors, learners are guided to match the third formant (F3) location to a visual target on a real-time acoustic spectrum. As the acoustic properties of correct English /r/differ across speakers, this study aimed to improve target selection by investigating the validity of individualised targets derived from children's non-rhotic vowels. A previously proposed prediction formula was adjusted using data from a child normative sample and tested in two groups of children. Study 1 found that predicted values were unexpectedly higher than actual F3 values in children whose /r/ errors had been remediated. To understand this discrepancy, Study 2 applied the formula to typically developing children and found that predicted values were also higher than actual F3 values, suggesting that different normative data might better represent the current samples. An updated formula is proposed, which can be used to generate individualised targets within acoustic biofeedback applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.