A preliminary comparison of fluent and non-fluent speech through Turkish predictive cluttering inventory-revised

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Aslı Altınsoy , Ramazan Sertan Özdemir , Şükrü Torun
{"title":"A preliminary comparison of fluent and non-fluent speech through Turkish predictive cluttering inventory-revised","authors":"Aslı Altınsoy ,&nbsp;Ramazan Sertan Özdemir ,&nbsp;Şükrü Torun","doi":"10.1016/j.jfludis.2023.106019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The aim of this study is to compare the speech fluency performance of non-fluent participants namely people with stuttering (PWS), people with cluttering (PWC) and people with cluttering and stuttering (PWCS) with a fluent control group using the Turkish version of Predictive Cluttering Inventory-revised (TR-PCI-r).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The study recruited non-fluent individuals (n = 60) and fluent controls (n = 60) between the ages of 6 and 55. The non-fluent group was perceptually evaluated by two speech and language pathologists (SLP). The speaking, reading and retelling samples were collected from 18 PWC, 17 PWCS, 25 PWS and 60 controls. The scores of each factor were compared. Age and gender differences were analyzed. Validity and reliability were calculated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The agreement between two SLPs was found to be at the barely acceptable level (<em>κ</em> = 0.378). PWC and PWCS produced parallel outcomes in the speech motor area. In every other domain and in total scores, PWC were different from PWCS, PWS, and the controls. There was a variation in the total scores obtained by the children and adolescents in the PWS and between males and females in the controls. Except for three items (namely items 8, 22, 27), TR-PCI-r met the content validity criterion. Furthermore, TR-PCI-r was found to be a reliable tool as shown by <em>ɑ</em>&gt; 0.70 and ICC values of between 0.75 and 0.90.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The scores from TR-PCI-r indicated that, speech motor characteristics of PWC and PWCS were similar. Other features assessed by the tool seemed to distinguish PWC from PWCS, PWS and controls.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Fluency Disorders","volume":"79 ","pages":"Article 106019"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094730X23000621/pdfft?md5=2b85ce8f1de7a035c5a9976dbfb44538&pid=1-s2.0-S0094730X23000621-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Fluency Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094730X23000621","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to compare the speech fluency performance of non-fluent participants namely people with stuttering (PWS), people with cluttering (PWC) and people with cluttering and stuttering (PWCS) with a fluent control group using the Turkish version of Predictive Cluttering Inventory-revised (TR-PCI-r).

Methods

The study recruited non-fluent individuals (n = 60) and fluent controls (n = 60) between the ages of 6 and 55. The non-fluent group was perceptually evaluated by two speech and language pathologists (SLP). The speaking, reading and retelling samples were collected from 18 PWC, 17 PWCS, 25 PWS and 60 controls. The scores of each factor were compared. Age and gender differences were analyzed. Validity and reliability were calculated.

Results

The agreement between two SLPs was found to be at the barely acceptable level (κ = 0.378). PWC and PWCS produced parallel outcomes in the speech motor area. In every other domain and in total scores, PWC were different from PWCS, PWS, and the controls. There was a variation in the total scores obtained by the children and adolescents in the PWS and between males and females in the controls. Except for three items (namely items 8, 22, 27), TR-PCI-r met the content validity criterion. Furthermore, TR-PCI-r was found to be a reliable tool as shown by ɑ> 0.70 and ICC values of between 0.75 and 0.90.

Conclusion

The scores from TR-PCI-r indicated that, speech motor characteristics of PWC and PWCS were similar. Other features assessed by the tool seemed to distinguish PWC from PWCS, PWS and controls.

土耳其语预测杂化量表对流利和不流利语音的初步比较
本研究的目的是比较不流利的参与者,即口吃者(PWS),杂乱者(PWC)和杂乱并口吃者(PWCS)与流利对照组的语言流畅性表现,使用土耳其语版本的预测杂乱量表-修订(TR-PCI-r)。该研究招募了年龄在6到55岁之间的不流利的人(n=60)和流利的对照组(n=60)。非流利组由两名言语和语言病理学家(SLP)进行知觉评估。从18名PWC、17名PWCS、25名PWS和60名对照中收集说话、阅读和复述样本。比较各因素的得分。分析年龄和性别差异。计算效度和信度。两个slp之间的一致性处于勉强可接受的水平(κ= 0.378)。PWC和PWCS在言语运动领域产生了相似的结果。在所有其他领域和总分中,PWC与PWCS、PWS和对照组不同。在PWS中的儿童和青少年以及对照组中的男性和女性之间获得的总分存在差异。除8、22、27三项外,TR-PCI-r均满足内容效度标准。此外,r - pci -r被发现是一个可靠的工具,其结果表明,r >0.70, ICC值在0.75和0.90之间。TR-PCI-r评分显示,PWC和PWCS的言语运动特征相似。该工具评估的其他特征似乎将PWC与PWCS、PWS和对照区分开来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Fluency Disorders
Journal of Fluency Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
23
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Fluency Disorders provides comprehensive coverage of clinical, experimental, and theoretical aspects of stuttering, including the latest remediation techniques. As the official journal of the International Fluency Association, the journal features full-length research and clinical reports; methodological, theoretical and philosophical articles; reviews; short communications and much more – all readily accessible and tailored to the needs of the professional.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信