| Literature DB >> 26612604 |
Tatiane Faria Barrozo1, Luciana de Oliveira Pagan-Neves2, Nadia Vilela1, Renata Mota Mamede Carvallo2, Haydée Fiszbein Wertzner3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Considering the importance of auditory information for the acquisition and organization of phonological rules, the assessment of (central) auditory processing contributes to both the diagnosis and targeting of speech therapy in children with speech sound disorders.Entities:
Keywords: Articulation disorders; Auditory perception; Avaliação; Evaluation; Percepção auditiva; Percepção da fala; Speech perception; Transtornos da articulação
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26612604 PMCID: PMC9444632 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2015.01.008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Otorhinolaryngol ISSN: 1808-8686
Descriptive values for percentage of occurrence of phonological processes in phonology tasks in the control group (CG) and study group (SG).
| Imitation of words task | Picture naming task | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phonological process | Group | Mean | Standard deviation | Phonological process | Group | Mean | Standard deviation | ||
| SR | No occurrence | SR | CG | 10 | 0.2 | 0.7 | |||
| SG | 11 | 0.2 | 0.7 | ||||||
| CH | CG | 10 | 0.2 | 0.6 | CH | CG | 10 | 0.2 | 0.7 |
| SG | 11 | 0 | 0 | SG | 11 | 0 | 0 | ||
| S | CG | 10 | 0 | 0 | S | CG | 10 | 0.4 | 1.4 |
| SG | 11 | 0.4 | 1.4 | SG | 11 | 1.2 | 2 | ||
| VB | CG | 10 | 0 | 0 | VB | CG | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| SG | 11 | 5.6 | 18.5 | SG | 11 | 6.1 | 20.1 | ||
| PB | No occurrence | PB | CG | 10 | 4.6 | 11.6 | |||
| SG | 11 | 4.1 | 13.7 | ||||||
| VF | CG | 10 | 0.2 | 0.6 | VF | CG | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| SG | 11 | 27.3 | 46.7 | SG | 11 | 26.3 | 43.1 | ||
| PF | CG | 10 | 16.7 | 31.4 | PF | CG | 10 | 20 | 26.7 |
| SG | 11 | 3 | 10 | SG | 11 | 0 | 0 | ||
| LS | CG | 10 | 16.3 | 21.3 | LS | CG | 10 | 22.7 | 26.8 |
| SG | 11 | 15.9 | 14.9 | SG | 11 | 14.9 | 19.2 | ||
| CR | CG | 10 | 29.2 | 27 | CR | CG | 10 | 30 | 29.6 |
| SG | 11 | 65.9 | 41.1 | SG | 11 | 55.7 | 40.8 | ||
| FCD | CG | 10 | 10 | 13.5 | FCD | CG | 10 | 10 | 21.6 |
| SG | 11 | 20.8 | 19.5 | SG | 11 | 27.3 | 27.2 | ||
| SV | CG | 10 | 0.3 | 1.1 | SV | No occurrence | |||
| SG | 11 | 0.6 | 1.4 | ||||||
| SD | CG | 10 | 22.9 | 37.1 | SD | CG | 10 | 22.1 | 39.8 |
| SG | 11 | 18.2 | 34 | SG | 11 | 20.1 | 38 | ||
| FD | CG | 10 | 24.4 | 36.2 | FD | CG | 10 | 24.4 | 38.4 |
| SG | 11 | 23.2 | 33.5 | SG | 11 | 28.3 | 44 | ||
n, number of subjects; SR, syllable reduction; CH, consonant harmony; S, stopping; VB, velar backing; PB, palatal backing; VF, velar fronting; PF, palatal fronting; LS, liquid simplification; CR, cluster reduction; FCD, final consonant deletion; SV, stop voicing; SD, stop devoicing; FD, fricative devoicing.
p-Values obtained in the comparison of distribution of LS, CR, FCD, SD, and FD processes between Control Group and Study Group.
| Phonological process | Phonology task | |
|---|---|---|
| Imitation of words | Picture naming | |
| LS | 0.88 | 0.555 |
| CR | 0.041 | 0.079 |
| FCD | 0.231 | 0.123 |
| SD | 0.852 | 0.938 |
| FD | 0.879 | 0.754 |
LS, liquid simplification; CR, cluster reduction; FCD, final consonant deletion; SD, stop devoicing; FD, fricative devoicing.
Significant difference.
Descriptive statistics for Percentage of Consonants Correct (PCC), Percentage of Consonants Correct-Revised (PCC-R), and Process Density Index (PDI) in the control group (CG) and study group (SG).
| Group | Mean | Standard deviation | Minimum | Median | Maximum | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CG | 10 | 82.9 | 7.5 | 70.1 | 84.6 | 90.7 | 0.031 |
| SG | 11 | 74.7 | 11.1 | 62.6 | 73.8 | 95.3 | |
| CG | 10 | 88 | 7.5 | 72.9 | 89.3 | 98.1 | 0.014 |
| SG | 11 | 78.6 | 10.3 | 64.5 | 74.8 | 95.3 | |
| CG | 10 | 0.33 | 0.21 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0.007 |
| SG | 11 | 0.64 | 0.32 | 0 | 0.65 | 1 | |
n, number of subjects.
Statistics: Student's t-test.
Significant difference.
Figure 1Individual and mean values of Percentage of Consonants Correct (PCC), Percentage of Consonants Correct-Revised (PCC-R), and Process Density Index (PDI) in the control group (CG) and study group (SG).
Figure 2Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for PDI.
Frequency distributions and percentages of Phonological Sensitivity Test-Auditory (PST-A) and Phonological Sensitivity Test-Visual (PST-V) in the control group (CG) and study group (SG).
| CG | SG | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Impaired | Normal | Impaired | Normal | |||||
| % | % | % | % | |||||
| | ||||||||
| Equal | 1 | 10 | 9 | 90 | 7 | 63.6 | 4 | 36.4 |
| Different | 0 | 0 | 10 | 100 | 7 | 63.6 | 4 | 36.4 |
| | ||||||||
| Equal | 1 | 10 | 9 | 90 | 9 | 81.8 | 2 | 18.2 |
| Different | 1 | 10 | 9 | 90 | 8 | 72.7 | 3 | 27.3 |
| | ||||||||
| Equal | 0 | 0 | 10 | 100 | 6 | 54.6 | 5 | 45.4 |
| Different | 0 | 0 | 10 | 100 | 3 | 27.3 | 8 | 72.7 |
| | ||||||||
| Equal | 2 | 20 | 8 | 80 | 7 | 63.6 | 4 | 36.4 |
| Different | 0 | 0 | 10 | 100 | 8 | 72.7 | 3 | 27.3 |
n, number of subjects.