An Observational Study of Discourse Tasks and Running Speech Sampling in the Assessment of Paediatric Voice Quality

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Victoria Reynolds, Kristin Scavo-Smith, Kate Oteng-Bediako, Sophie Scanlon
{"title":"An Observational Study of Discourse Tasks and Running Speech Sampling in the Assessment of Paediatric Voice Quality","authors":"Victoria Reynolds,&nbsp;Kristin Scavo-Smith,&nbsp;Kate Oteng-Bediako,&nbsp;Sophie Scanlon","doi":"10.1111/1460-6984.70132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Running speech sampling is an essential component of a paediatric voice evaluation, in that it should provide the examiner with a representative vocal sample of the child's everyday voice use outside of the clinic setting. Current speech sampling practices, consisting of reading tasks, informal conversation sampling and the voice question (‘Tell me about your voice problem’), may not elicit consistent samples or samples of sufficient length to allow the examiner to make a reliable and valid judgement about vocal quality. The aim of this study is to compare the voice quality of children produced in response to existing running speech sampling methods and narrative elicitation tasks commonly used in language sampling activities, which are hypothesized to elicit longer units of connected speech.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Fifty-three children participated in the following tasks: prolonged vowels /a/ and /i/, the CAPE-V sentences. The reference standard running speech sampling tasks were: the voice question, an informal conversation sample and the Rainbow Passage. The comparison running speech sampling tasks were: My First Day, the Bus Story Test and the Test of Narrative Language-2. All tasks were audio-recorded. The voice samples were independently rated by two trained speech-language pathologists using the CAPE-V instrument. Inter-rater reliability was acceptable for all perceptual tasks (ICC 0.901–1.00). CAPE-V ratings were considered the primary comparison measure; smoothed cepstral peak prominence was considered a secondary comparison measure. Diagnostic indicators, sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were calculated in order to evaluate the levels of diagnostic decision-making of the comparison tasks compared to the existing reference standard tasks.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>On perceptual analysis, weak to strong correlations (<i>r</i> = 0.291–0.697) were observed between reference tasks, and weak to very strong correlations between reference and comparison tasks (<i>r</i> = 0.200–0.747). When diagnostic utility was compared, one or more indicators were at an acceptable level between the conversation sample and the narrative tasks, and the voice question and three out of four narrative tasks.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>A narrative elicitation procedure, such as a re-tell or story generation task, may be suitable for eliciting a running speech sample in paediatric voice evaluations. Both the acoustic properties of the vocal signal and the perceptual properties of the voice, when compared between conversational speech and the narrative tasks, are correlated and lead to similar diagnostic decisions, as evidenced by acceptable values on the diagnostic indicators calculated in this study.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Summary</h3>\n \n <div>After reading this article, participants will:\n\n <ul>\n \n <li>Describe current practices in eliciting running speech samples in the evaluation of paediatric voice disorders.</li>\n \n <li>Analyze the perceptual and acoustic properties of children's voices across different genres of speech sampling at the discourse level.</li>\n \n <li>Examine the utility of formal discourse sampling as a means of eliciting running speech for paediatric voice disorders.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS</h3>\n \n <div><i>What is already known on this subject</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>Perceptual evaluation of voice quality poses challenges, particularly in the paediatric population. A running speech sample is an essential component in order to provide a representative sample of an individual's voice quality outside the clinic setting. Current sampling practices are non-standardized and may not be appropriate for all children, especially those with reading and/or language difficulties.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n <div><i>What this paper adds to existing knowledge</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>This study presents data comparing the voice quality of children, elicited using current reference standard tasks and narrative sampling tasks. Such tasks are more commonly used in the evaluation of language abilities, but could illustrate a way in which a clinician could elicit a sufficiently long, ecologically valid, running speech sample for perceptual voice evaluation. In addition, the sample could be analysed as a screener of language skills.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n <div><i>What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>While this study could be considered exploratory, it is possible that using narrative elicitation techniques in paediatric voice evaluations could yield sufficiently long units of speech that are representative of a child's everyday speaking voice. Such practices would add valuable information regarding language skills to the evaluation process.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":49182,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders","volume":"60 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12479388/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1460-6984.70132","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Running speech sampling is an essential component of a paediatric voice evaluation, in that it should provide the examiner with a representative vocal sample of the child's everyday voice use outside of the clinic setting. Current speech sampling practices, consisting of reading tasks, informal conversation sampling and the voice question (‘Tell me about your voice problem’), may not elicit consistent samples or samples of sufficient length to allow the examiner to make a reliable and valid judgement about vocal quality. The aim of this study is to compare the voice quality of children produced in response to existing running speech sampling methods and narrative elicitation tasks commonly used in language sampling activities, which are hypothesized to elicit longer units of connected speech.

Methods

Fifty-three children participated in the following tasks: prolonged vowels /a/ and /i/, the CAPE-V sentences. The reference standard running speech sampling tasks were: the voice question, an informal conversation sample and the Rainbow Passage. The comparison running speech sampling tasks were: My First Day, the Bus Story Test and the Test of Narrative Language-2. All tasks were audio-recorded. The voice samples were independently rated by two trained speech-language pathologists using the CAPE-V instrument. Inter-rater reliability was acceptable for all perceptual tasks (ICC 0.901–1.00). CAPE-V ratings were considered the primary comparison measure; smoothed cepstral peak prominence was considered a secondary comparison measure. Diagnostic indicators, sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were calculated in order to evaluate the levels of diagnostic decision-making of the comparison tasks compared to the existing reference standard tasks.

Results

On perceptual analysis, weak to strong correlations (r = 0.291–0.697) were observed between reference tasks, and weak to very strong correlations between reference and comparison tasks (r = 0.200–0.747). When diagnostic utility was compared, one or more indicators were at an acceptable level between the conversation sample and the narrative tasks, and the voice question and three out of four narrative tasks.

Conclusions

A narrative elicitation procedure, such as a re-tell or story generation task, may be suitable for eliciting a running speech sample in paediatric voice evaluations. Both the acoustic properties of the vocal signal and the perceptual properties of the voice, when compared between conversational speech and the narrative tasks, are correlated and lead to similar diagnostic decisions, as evidenced by acceptable values on the diagnostic indicators calculated in this study.

Summary

After reading this article, participants will:
  • Describe current practices in eliciting running speech samples in the evaluation of paediatric voice disorders.
  • Analyze the perceptual and acoustic properties of children's voices across different genres of speech sampling at the discourse level.
  • Examine the utility of formal discourse sampling as a means of eliciting running speech for paediatric voice disorders.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject
  • Perceptual evaluation of voice quality poses challenges, particularly in the paediatric population. A running speech sample is an essential component in order to provide a representative sample of an individual's voice quality outside the clinic setting. Current sampling practices are non-standardized and may not be appropriate for all children, especially those with reading and/or language difficulties.
What this paper adds to existing knowledge
  • This study presents data comparing the voice quality of children, elicited using current reference standard tasks and narrative sampling tasks. Such tasks are more commonly used in the evaluation of language abilities, but could illustrate a way in which a clinician could elicit a sufficiently long, ecologically valid, running speech sample for perceptual voice evaluation. In addition, the sample could be analysed as a screener of language skills.
What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?
  • While this study could be considered exploratory, it is possible that using narrative elicitation techniques in paediatric voice evaluations could yield sufficiently long units of speech that are representative of a child's everyday speaking voice. Such practices would add valuable information regarding language skills to the evaluation process.

Abstract Image

语篇任务和运行语音采样在儿科语音质量评估中的观察研究。
引言:运行语音采样是儿科语音评估的重要组成部分,因为它应该为审查员提供儿童在临床环境之外日常语音使用的代表性语音样本。目前的语音抽样练习,包括阅读任务、非正式谈话抽样和声音问题(“告诉我你的声音问题”),可能无法获得一致的样本或足够长度的样本,从而使考官对声音质量做出可靠和有效的判断。本研究的目的是比较现有的运行语音采样方法和语言采样活动中常用的叙述引出任务所产生的儿童语音质量,这些任务被假设为引出较长的连接语音单元。方法:53名儿童参与了以下任务:延长元音/a/和/i/, CAPE-V句子。运行语音采样任务的参考标准是:语音问题、非正式对话样本和彩虹通道。比较运行的语音采样任务是:我的第一天,巴士故事测试和叙事语言测试-2。所有的任务都有录音记录。语音样本由两名训练有素的语言病理学家使用CAPE-V仪器独立评定。所有知觉任务的评分者间信度均可接受(ICC 0.901-1.00)。CAPE-V评级被认为是主要的比较指标;平滑倒谱峰突出被认为是次要的比较措施。计算诊断指标、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值,以评价比较任务相对于现有参考标准任务的诊断决策水平。结果:在感知分析中,参考任务与比较任务之间存在弱到强的相关性(r = 0.291-0.697),参考任务与比较任务之间存在弱到极强的相关性(r = 0.200-0.747)。当比较诊断效用时,在对话样本和叙述任务、语音问题和四分之三的叙述任务之间,有一个或多个指标处于可接受的水平。结论:叙述引出程序,如复述或故事生成任务,可能适合在儿科语音评估中引出一个运行的语音样本。语音信号的声学特性和语音的感知特性,在会话语音和叙事任务之间进行比较时,都是相关的,并导致类似的诊断决策,正如本研究计算的诊断指标的可接受值所证明的那样。摘要:阅读本文后,参与者将:描述目前在儿科语音障碍评估中提取运行语音样本的做法。在语篇层面分析不同类型语音采样下儿童声音的感知和声学特性。检查正式话语抽样作为引出儿童语音障碍的运行语言的一种手段的效用。本文补充的内容:关于这个主题的已知内容对语音质量的感知评估提出了挑战,特别是在儿科人群中。为了在诊所之外提供个人语音质量的代表性样本,运行语音样本是必不可少的组成部分。目前的抽样做法是非标准化的,可能不适合所有儿童,特别是那些有阅读和/或语言困难的儿童。本研究提供了比较儿童语音质量的数据,这些数据是使用当前的参考标准任务和叙述抽样任务得出的。这样的任务更常用于语言能力的评估,但可以说明一种方法,在这种方法中,临床医生可以引出一个足够长的、生态有效的、运行的语音样本,用于感知语音评估。此外,样本可以作为语言技能筛选器进行分析。这项工作的潜在或实际临床意义是什么?虽然这项研究可以被认为是探索性的,但在儿科语音评估中使用叙事引出技术可能会产生足够长的语音单位,代表儿童的日常说话声音。这种做法将在评价过程中增加有关语言技能的宝贵资料。
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
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
116
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders (IJLCD) is the official journal of the Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists. The Journal welcomes submissions on all aspects of speech, language, communication disorders and speech and language therapy. It provides a forum for the exchange of information and discussion of issues of clinical or theoretical relevance in the above areas.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信