MedElevator
Войти в исследования Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2015
Characteristics of Fluency and Speech in Two Families With High Incidences of Stuttering.
СтатьяResearch Support, N.I.H., IntramuralНазвание 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.
Stager Sheila V, Freeman Frances J, Braun Allen
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study presents data from 2 families with high incidence of stuttering, comparing methods of phenotype assignment and exploring the presence of other fluency disorders and corresponding speech characteristics.
METHOD: Three methods for assigning phenotype of stuttering were used: self-identification, family identification, and expert identification. Agreement on which individuals were assigned by each of these methods was studied. Multiple measures of fluency and speech production were obtained.
RESULTS: Self-reports and descriptions of blocking rather than self-identification as a person who stutters demonstrated the best agreement with expert identification of stuttering. Family identification showed poor agreement with both expert and self-identification of stuttering. Using binary categories of fluent or stuttering, 90% of individuals in 1 family were classified by expert consensus. Only 70% of the other family could be similarly categorized. Experts required 2 other categories, cluttering and other fluency disorders, to fully characterize dysfluency within this family. These 2 families also demonstrated differences in speech production.
CONCLUSION: Some families with high incidence of stuttering may also have high incidence of other fluency disorders and other speech-production difficulties. This finding may have ramifications for genetic studies, including criteria for defining phenotype and collapsing data across multiple families.
METHOD: Three methods for assigning phenotype of stuttering were used: self-identification, family identification, and expert identification. Agreement on which individuals were assigned by each of these methods was studied. Multiple measures of fluency and speech production were obtained.
RESULTS: Self-reports and descriptions of blocking rather than self-identification as a person who stutters demonstrated the best agreement with expert identification of stuttering. Family identification showed poor agreement with both expert and self-identification of stuttering. Using binary categories of fluent or stuttering, 90% of individuals in 1 family were classified by expert consensus. Only 70% of the other family could be similarly categorized. Experts required 2 other categories, cluttering and other fluency disorders, to fully characterize dysfluency within this family. These 2 families also demonstrated differences in speech production.
CONCLUSION: Some families with high incidence of stuttering may also have high incidence of other fluency disorders and other speech-production difficulties. This finding may have ramifications for genetic studies, including criteria for defining phenotype and collapsing data across multiple families.