Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28933620›Full record

ArticleClinical linguistics & phonetics2018

Sequential processing deficit as a shared persisting biomarker in dyslexia and childhood apraxia of speech.

Beate Peter, Hope Lancaster, Caitlin Vose, Kyle Middleton, Carol Stoel-Gammon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical linguistics & phonetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Beyond Sounds: Decoding Speech Errors and Phonological Awareness in Preschoolers.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Beate Petera Department of Speech and Hearing Science , Arizona State University , Tempe , AZ.ORCID 0000-0002-9083-8522
Hope Lancastera Department of Speech and Hearing Science , Arizona State University , Tempe , AZ.
Caitlin Vosea Department of Speech and Hearing Science , Arizona State University , Tempe , AZ.
Kyle Middletonc Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences , University of Washington , Seattle , WA.
Carol Stoel-Gammonc Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences , University of Washington , Seattle , WA.
Arizona State University · USUniversity of Washington · USSaint Louis University · US

Funding

Training Program in Hearing and BalanceT32DC000033 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI WERNER, LYNNE A. · 1991 to 2015
$3.9M
Genetics of speech disordersR03DC010886 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI PETER, BEATE · 2011 to 2013
$460k
NIDCD NIH HHS R03 DC010886NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC000033
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that individuals with dyslexia and individuals with childhood apraxia of speech share an underlying persisting deficit in processing sequential information. Levels of impairment (sensory encoding, memory, retrieval, and motor planning/programming) were also investigated. Participants were 22 adults with dyslexia, 10 adults with a probable history of childhood apraxia of speech (phCAS), and 22 typical controls. All participants completed nonword repetition, multisyllabic real word repetition, and nonword decoding tasks. Using phonological process analysis, errors were classified as sequence or substitution errors. Adults with dyslexia and adults with phCAS showed evidence of persisting nonword repetition deficits. In all three tasks, the adults in the two disorder groups produced more errors of both classes than the controls, but disproportionally more sequencing than substitution errors during the nonword repetition task. During the real word repetition task, the phCAS produced the most sequencing errors, whereas during the nonword decoding task, the dyslexia group produced the most sequencing errors. Performance during multisyllabic motor speech tasks, relative to monosyllabic conditions, was correlated with the sequencing error component during nonword repetition. The results provide evidence for a shared persisting sequential processing deficit in the dyslexia and phCAS groups during linguistic and motor speech tasks. Evidence for impairments in sensory encoding, short-term memory, and motor planning/programming was found in both disorder groups. Future studies should investigate clinical applications regarding preventative and targeted interventions towards cross-modal treatment effects.

Indexed as

ApraxiasBiomarkersDyslexiaReadingSpeech Production MeasurementAdultHumansMemory, Short-TermPhoneticsSpeechBiomarkersAdultsphonologyreadingshort-term memoryspeech motor control

Identifiers

PMID28933620
PMCPMC6085870
OpenAlexW2760348185

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.