American journal of speech-language pathology · 2022
Assessment and Diagnostic Standards of Apraxia of Speech in Chinese-Speaking Adults and Children: A Scoping Review.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wong Eddy Chun Ho, Wong Min Ney, Velleman Shelley L
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Apraxia of speech (AOS) and childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) are motor-based speech disorders that have been well studied in Indo-European languages. There is limited understanding of these disorders in speakers of Sino-Tibetan languages, such as Chinese. The purpose of this study is to review methods used in research studies for the assessment and diagnosis of AOS and CAS in Chinese speakers.
METHOD: This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Articles with a focus on AOS or CAS in Chinese speakers were systematically searched in seven English and six Chinese databases. Three reviewers performed independent screening, data extraction, and quality assessment after obtaining 100% agreement on the prescreening exercise. A qualitative analysis was conducted to rate the quality of diagnoses, ranging from high (Level I) to low (Level III), with Level IV assigned to studies for which the appropriate rating was unclear due to insufficient evidence.
RESULTS: Twenty-eight AOS articles and five CAS articles were identified. A variety of assessment and diagnostic methods were reported. No study of Chinese speakers with AOS or CAS received a rating of Level I. The highest level achieved was Level IIIa for both AOS and CAS studies.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no reliable and valid test or method for the diagnosis of AOS or CAS in Chinese speakers. The current gold standard of diagnosis is based upon expert perceptual judgment. Further single-language and cross-linguistic investigations of AOS and CAS and the future development of assessment and diagnostic methods are recommended.
METHOD: This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Articles with a focus on AOS or CAS in Chinese speakers were systematically searched in seven English and six Chinese databases. Three reviewers performed independent screening, data extraction, and quality assessment after obtaining 100% agreement on the prescreening exercise. A qualitative analysis was conducted to rate the quality of diagnoses, ranging from high (Level I) to low (Level III), with Level IV assigned to studies for which the appropriate rating was unclear due to insufficient evidence.
RESULTS: Twenty-eight AOS articles and five CAS articles were identified. A variety of assessment and diagnostic methods were reported. No study of Chinese speakers with AOS or CAS received a rating of Level I. The highest level achieved was Level IIIa for both AOS and CAS studies.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no reliable and valid test or method for the diagnosis of AOS or CAS in Chinese speakers. The current gold standard of diagnosis is based upon expert perceptual judgment. Further single-language and cross-linguistic investigations of AOS and CAS and the future development of assessment and diagnostic methods are recommended.