Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35944047›Full record

ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2022

Baseline Stimulability Predicts Patterns of Response to Traditional and Ultrasound Biofeedback Treatment for Residual Speech Sound Disorder.

Tara McAllister, Amanda Eads, Heather Kabakoff, Marc Scott, Suzanne Boyce, D H Whalen, Jonathan L Preston

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tara McAllisterDepartment of Communicative Sciences and Disorders, New York University, NY.ORCID 0000-0003-2230-2897
Amanda EadsDepartment of Communicative Sciences and Disorders, New York University, NY.
Heather KabakoffDepartment of Neurology, Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, NY.
Marc ScottDepartment of Applied Statistics, Social Science, and Humanities, New York University, NY.
Suzanne BoyceHaskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT.
D H WhalenHaskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT.
Jonathan L PrestonHaskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT.ORCID 0000-0001-9971-6321
Google (United States) · USThe Graduate Center, CUNY · US

Funding

Biofeedback-Enhanced Treatment for Speech Sound Disorder: Randomized Controlled Trial and Delineation of Sensorimotor SubtypesR01DC017476 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI Tara McAllister · 2019 to 2026
$5.3M
Improving clinical speech remediation with ultrasound technologyR01DC013668 · NIDCD · CUNY GRADUATE SCH AND UNIV CTR · PI BOYCE, SUZANNE ELIZABETH, WHALEN, DOUGLAS H · 2014 to 2018
$3.4M
Establishing the Role of Sensorimotor Skills in Speech Development and DisordersF31DC018197 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI KABAKOFF, HEATHER M · 2019 to 2020
$55k
NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC018197NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC013668NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC017476
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to identify predictors of response to treatment for residual speech sound disorder (RSSD) affecting English rhotics. Progress was tracked during an initial phase of traditional motor-based treatment and a longer phase of treatment incorporating ultrasound biofeedback. Based on previous literature, we focused on baseline stimulability and sensory acuity as predictors of interest.

methodThirty-three individuals aged 9-15 years with residual distortions of /ɹ/ received a course of individual intervention comprising 1 week of intensive traditional treatment and 9 weeks of ultrasound biofeedback treatment. Stimulability for /ɹ/ was probed prior to treatment, after the traditional treatment phase, and after the end of all treatment. Accuracy of /ɹ/ production in each probe was assessed with an acoustic measure: normalized third formant (F3)-second formant (F2) distance. Model-based clustering analysis was applied to these acoustic measures to identify different average trajectories of progress over the course of treatment. The resulting clusters were compared with respect to acuity in auditory and somatosensory domains.

resultsAll but four individuals were judged to exhibit a clinically significant response to the combined course of treatment. Two major clusters were identified. The "low stimulability" cluster was characterized by very low accuracy at baseline, minimal response to traditional treatment, and strong response to ultrasound biofeedback. The "high stimulability" group was more accurate at baseline and made significant gains in both traditional and ultrasound biofeedback phases of treatment. The clusters did not differ with respect to sensory acuity.

conclusionsThis research accords with clinical intuition in finding that individuals who are more stimulable at baseline are more likely to respond to traditional intervention, whereas less stimulable individuals may derive greater relative benefit from biofeedback. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20422236.

Indexed as

ApraxiasSpeech Sound DisorderBiofeedback, PsychologyHumansLanguageSpeechSpeech Therapy

Identifiers

PMID35944047
PMCPMC9911120
OpenAlexW4290779987

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.