Search

Speech intelligibility is an essential though complex construct in speech pathology. In this paper, we investigated the interrater reliability and validity of two types of intelligibility measures: a rating-based measure, through Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), and a transcription-based measure called Accuracy of Words (AcW), through two forms of orthographic transcriptions, one containing only existing words (EWTrans) and one allowing all sorts of words, including both existing words and pseudowords (AWTrans). Both VAS and AcW scores were collected from five expert raters. We selected speakers with various severity levels of dysarthria (SevL) and employed two types of speech materials, i.e. meaningful sentences and word lists. To measure reliability, we applied Generalizability Theory, which is relatively unknown in the field of pathological speech and language research but enables more comprehensive analyses than traditional methods, e.g., the intraclass correlation coefficient. The results convincingly indicate that five expert raters were sufficient to provide reliable rating-based (VAS) and transcription-based (AcW) measures, and that reliability increased as the number of raters or utterances increased. Generalizability Theory has proved effective in systematically dealing with reliability issues in our experimental design. We also investigated construct and concurrent validity. Construct validity was addressed by exploring the correlations between VAS and AcW within and across speech materials. Concurrent validity was addressed by exploring the correlations between our measures, i.e. VAS and AcW, and two external measures, i.e. phoneme intelligibility and SevL. The correlations corroborate the validity of VAS and AcW to assess speech intelligibility, both in sentences and word lists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brain tumour patients with mild language disturbances are typically underdiagnosed due to lack of sensitive tests leading to negative effects in daily communicative and social life. We aim to develop a Dutch standardised test-battery, the Diagnostic Instrument for Mild Aphasia (DIMA) to detect characteristics of mild aphasia at the main linguistic levels phonology, semantics and (morpho-)syntax in production and comprehension. We designed 4 DIMA subtests: 1) repetition (words, non-words, compounds and sentences), 2) semantic odd-picture-out (objects and actions), 3) sentence completion and 4) sentence judgment (accuracy and reaction time). A normative study was carried out in a healthy Dutch-speaking population (N = 211) divided into groups of gender, age and education. Clinical application of DIMA was demonstrated in two brain tumour patients (glioma and meningioma). Standard language tests were also administered: object naming, verbal fluency (category and letter), and Token Test. Performance was at ceiling on all sub-tests, except semantic odd-picture-out actions, with an effect of age and education on most subtests. Clinical application DIMA: repetition was impaired in both cases. Reaction time in the sentence judgment test (phonology and syntax) was impaired (not accuracy) in one patient. Standard language tests: category fluency was impaired in both cases and object naming in one patient. The Token Test was not able to detect language disturbances in both cases. DIMA seems to be sensitive to capture mild aphasic deficits. DIMA is expected to be of great potential for standard assessment of language functions in patients with also other neurological diseases than brain tumours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Learning English as a foreign language (FL) is mandatory for children with developmental language disorders (DLD) in elementary education in the Netherlands. Because of their difficulties in acquiring their first language, learning an FL at school can be challenging. To date, almost no literature on children with DLD and FL learning exists. The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between language proficiency in Dutch of monolingual and multilingual children with DLD and learning English as an FL. A cross-sectional study was conducted in four special education schools for children with DLD. Thirty-five sixth graders (mean age 12;3 years) participated in this study. Twenty-two children were monolingual, and 13 children were multilingual. Correlation analyses between scores on standardised Dutch language tests and a standardised test for English proficiency were performed. Because the English proficiency test partly relies on reading skills, scores on a Dutch word decoding test were included in the analyses. Results show that the children with DLD performed poorly on the FL proficiency test when compared to typically developing children. Significant positive relationships were found between Dutch and English language skills of children with DLD, with no significant differences in FL proficiency between the monolingual and multilingual groups. Possibly, children with DLD cannot achieve acceptable proficiency levels of English as an FL, because of poor word decoding skills and impaired morphosyntactic skills in Dutch. Future research should focus on oral English proficiency of the children, because the English proficiency test only uses written and auditory presented tasks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]