ArticleBrain sciences2023
Comparison of In-Person and Online Recordings in the Clinical Teleassessment of Speech Production: A Pilot Study.
Article in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acoustic and Perceptual Characteristics of Compressed Dysarthric Speech: Implications for Teleassessment.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- Form-Meaning Relations in Russian Confirmative and Surprise Declarative Questions.Language and speech · 2026Article
- Neural and Behavioral Predictors of Speech Motor Sequence Learning in Primary Progressive Aphasia.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- I speak Tele outlines the design of a digitized dysarthria assessment.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In certain circumstances, speech and language therapy is proposed in telepractice as a practical alternative to in-person services. However, little is known about the minimum quality requirements of recordings in the teleassessment of motor speech disorders (MSD) utilizing validated tools. The aim here is to examine the comparability of offline analyses based on speech samples acquired from three sources: (1) in-person recordings with high quality material, serving as the baseline/gold standard; (2) in-person recordings with standard equipment; (3) online recordings from videoconferencing. Speech samples were recorded simultaneously from these three sources in fifteen neurotypical speakers performing a screening battery of MSD and analyzed by three speech and language therapists. Intersource and interrater agreements were estimated with intraclass correlation coefficients on seventeen perceptual and acoustic parameters. While the interrater agreement was excellent for most speech parameters, especially on high quality in-person recordings, it decreased in online recordings. The intersource agreement was excellent for speech rate and mean fundamental frequency measures when comparing high quality in-person recordings to the other conditions. The intersource agreement was poor for voice parameters, but also for perceptual measures of intelligibility and articulation. Clinicians who plan to teleassess MSD should adapt their recording setting to the parameters they want to reliably interpret.
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.