听觉加工和言语障碍:行为和电生理的发现。

IF 1.8 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Konstantinos Drosos, Paris Vogazianos, Dionysios Tafiadis, Louiza Voniati, Alexandra Papanicolaou, Klea Panayidou, Chryssoula Thodi
{"title":"听觉加工和言语障碍:行为和电生理的发现。","authors":"Konstantinos Drosos, Paris Vogazianos, Dionysios Tafiadis, Louiza Voniati, Alexandra Papanicolaou, Klea Panayidou, Chryssoula Thodi","doi":"10.3390/audiolres15050119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Children diagnosed with Speech Sound Disorders (SSDs) encounter difficulties in speech perception, especially when listening in the presence of background noise. Recommended protocols for auditory processing evaluation include behavioral linguistic and speech processing tests, as well as objective electrophysiological measures. The present study compared the auditory processing profiles of children with SSD and typically developing (TD) children using a battery of behavioral language and auditory tests combined with auditory evoked responses. <b>Methods:</b> Forty (40) parents of 7-10 years old Greek Cypriot children completed parent questionnaires related to their children's listening; their children completed an assessment comprising language, phonology, auditory processing, and auditory evoked responses. The experimental group included 24 children with a history of SSDs; the control group consisted of 16 TD children. <b>Results:</b> Three factors significantly differentiated SSD from TD children: Factor 1 (auditory processing screening), Factor 5 (phonological awareness), and Factor 13 (Auditory Brainstem Response-ABR wave V latency). Among these, Factor 1 consistently predicted SSD classification both independently and in combined models, indicating strong ecological and diagnostic relevance. This predictive power suggests real-world listening behaviors are central to SSD differentiation. The significant correlation between Factor 5 and Factor 13 may suggest an interaction between auditory processing at the brainstem level and higher-order phonological manipulation. <b>Conclusions:</b> This research underscores the diagnostic significance of integrating behavioral and physiological metrics through dimensional and predictive methodologies. Factor 1, which focuses on authentic listening environments, was identified as the strongest predictor. These results advocate for the inclusion of ecologically valid listening items in the screening for APD. Poor discrimination of speech in noise imposes discrepancies between incoming auditory information and retained phonological representations, which disrupts the implicit processing mechanisms that align auditory input with phonological representations stored in memory. Speech and language pathologists can incorporate pertinent auditory processing assessment findings to identify potential language-processing challenges and formulate more effective therapeutic intervention strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":44133,"journal":{"name":"Audiology Research","volume":"15 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12452735/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Auditory Processing and Speech Sound Disorders: Behavioral and Electrophysiological Findings.\",\"authors\":\"Konstantinos Drosos, Paris Vogazianos, Dionysios Tafiadis, Louiza Voniati, Alexandra Papanicolaou, Klea Panayidou, Chryssoula Thodi\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/audiolres15050119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Children diagnosed with Speech Sound Disorders (SSDs) encounter difficulties in speech perception, especially when listening in the presence of background noise. Recommended protocols for auditory processing evaluation include behavioral linguistic and speech processing tests, as well as objective electrophysiological measures. The present study compared the auditory processing profiles of children with SSD and typically developing (TD) children using a battery of behavioral language and auditory tests combined with auditory evoked responses. <b>Methods:</b> Forty (40) parents of 7-10 years old Greek Cypriot children completed parent questionnaires related to their children's listening; their children completed an assessment comprising language, phonology, auditory processing, and auditory evoked responses. The experimental group included 24 children with a history of SSDs; the control group consisted of 16 TD children. <b>Results:</b> Three factors significantly differentiated SSD from TD children: Factor 1 (auditory processing screening), Factor 5 (phonological awareness), and Factor 13 (Auditory Brainstem Response-ABR wave V latency). Among these, Factor 1 consistently predicted SSD classification both independently and in combined models, indicating strong ecological and diagnostic relevance. This predictive power suggests real-world listening behaviors are central to SSD differentiation. The significant correlation between Factor 5 and Factor 13 may suggest an interaction between auditory processing at the brainstem level and higher-order phonological manipulation. <b>Conclusions:</b> This research underscores the diagnostic significance of integrating behavioral and physiological metrics through dimensional and predictive methodologies. Factor 1, which focuses on authentic listening environments, was identified as the strongest predictor. These results advocate for the inclusion of ecologically valid listening items in the screening for APD. Poor discrimination of speech in noise imposes discrepancies between incoming auditory information and retained phonological representations, which disrupts the implicit processing mechanisms that align auditory input with phonological representations stored in memory. Speech and language pathologists can incorporate pertinent auditory processing assessment findings to identify potential language-processing challenges and formulate more effective therapeutic intervention strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44133,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Audiology Research\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12452735/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Audiology Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/audiolres15050119\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiology Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/audiolres15050119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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

摘要

背景:被诊断为语音障碍(ssd)的儿童在语音感知方面遇到困难,特别是在有背景噪音的情况下听。推荐的听觉处理评估方案包括行为语言和语音处理测试,以及客观电生理测量。本研究采用一系列行为语言和听觉测试结合听觉诱发反应,比较了SSD儿童和正常发育(TD)儿童的听觉加工特征。方法:40(40)名7-10岁希族塞族儿童家长填写与孩子听力相关的家长问卷;他们的孩子完成了一项评估,包括语言、音韵学、听觉处理和听觉诱发反应。实验组包括24例有ssd病史的儿童;对照组为16例TD患儿。结果:因子1(听觉加工筛选)、因子5(语音意识)和因子13(听觉脑干反应- abr波V潜伏期)是区分SSD和TD儿童的显著因素。其中,因子1无论在独立模型中还是在联合模型中都一致地预测SSD分类,表明具有很强的生态学和诊断相关性。这种预测能力表明,现实世界的倾听行为是SSD区分的核心。因子5和因子13之间的显著相关性可能表明脑干水平的听觉加工与高阶语音操作之间存在相互作用。结论:本研究强调了通过维度和预测方法整合行为和生理指标的诊断意义。因素1侧重于真实的聆听环境,被认为是最强的预测因子。这些结果提倡在APD筛查中纳入生态有效的听力项目。在噪声环境下,语音识别能力差导致输入的听觉信息和保留的语音表征之间存在差异,这破坏了将听觉输入与存储在记忆中的语音表征相一致的内隐处理机制。语音和语言病理学家可以结合相关的听觉处理评估结果来识别潜在的语言处理挑战,并制定更有效的治疗干预策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Auditory Processing and Speech Sound Disorders: Behavioral and Electrophysiological Findings.

Background: Children diagnosed with Speech Sound Disorders (SSDs) encounter difficulties in speech perception, especially when listening in the presence of background noise. Recommended protocols for auditory processing evaluation include behavioral linguistic and speech processing tests, as well as objective electrophysiological measures. The present study compared the auditory processing profiles of children with SSD and typically developing (TD) children using a battery of behavioral language and auditory tests combined with auditory evoked responses. Methods: Forty (40) parents of 7-10 years old Greek Cypriot children completed parent questionnaires related to their children's listening; their children completed an assessment comprising language, phonology, auditory processing, and auditory evoked responses. The experimental group included 24 children with a history of SSDs; the control group consisted of 16 TD children. Results: Three factors significantly differentiated SSD from TD children: Factor 1 (auditory processing screening), Factor 5 (phonological awareness), and Factor 13 (Auditory Brainstem Response-ABR wave V latency). Among these, Factor 1 consistently predicted SSD classification both independently and in combined models, indicating strong ecological and diagnostic relevance. This predictive power suggests real-world listening behaviors are central to SSD differentiation. The significant correlation between Factor 5 and Factor 13 may suggest an interaction between auditory processing at the brainstem level and higher-order phonological manipulation. Conclusions: This research underscores the diagnostic significance of integrating behavioral and physiological metrics through dimensional and predictive methodologies. Factor 1, which focuses on authentic listening environments, was identified as the strongest predictor. These results advocate for the inclusion of ecologically valid listening items in the screening for APD. Poor discrimination of speech in noise imposes discrepancies between incoming auditory information and retained phonological representations, which disrupts the implicit processing mechanisms that align auditory input with phonological representations stored in memory. Speech and language pathologists can incorporate pertinent auditory processing assessment findings to identify potential language-processing challenges and formulate more effective therapeutic intervention strategies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Audiology Research
Audiology Research AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
23.50%
发文量
56
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of Audiology Research is to publish contemporary, ethical, clinically relevant scientific researches related to the basic science and clinical aspects of the auditory and vestibular system and diseases of the ear that can be used by clinicians, scientists and specialists to improve understanding and treatment of patients with audiological and neurotological disorders.
×
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