ArticleCoDAS2025
Classification of speech nasality of individuals with cleft lip and palate with distinct ordinal scales.
Article in CoDAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate whether there is a difference in the classification of speech hypernasality by inexperienced listeners using different ordinal scales; to verify the agreement of the listeners in the analyses when using these scales; and to verify whether the order in which the scales are presented influences the results.
methodsTwenty Speech-Language Pathology students classified the degrees of hypernasality of 40 (oral) samples from patients with cleft lip and palate. Ten performed the classifications using a 4-point scale (absent, mild, moderate, and severe) and, after two weeks, using a 3-point scale (absent, slightly hypernasal, and very hypernasal). Other ten students performed the same classifications, but in reverse order. The classifications were made remotely and documented on a form.
resultsThe average percentage of correct responses by the students, in relation to the gold standard, was significantly higher for the 3-point scale. There was no significant interaction between the order of presentation and the scale for the percentage of correct classifications. The students' agreement with the gold standard assessment was fair (3-point scale) and moderate (4-point scale). The mean percentage of agreement of the intra-rater analyses was significantly higher for the 3-point scale. There was no significant interaction between presentation order and scale for the percentage of intra-rater classifications. The Kappa coefficient index showed more favorable intra-rater agreement for the reduced scale.
conclusionThe reduced scale favored the classification of speech hypernasality by listeners and can be considered an important strategy to favor the initial evaluations of students in Speech Therapy during their training.
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.