| Literature DB >> 35509705 |
Soheila Saeedi1, Hamid Bouraghi2, Mohammad-Sadegh Seifpanahi3, Marjan Ghazisaeedi1.
Abstract
Introduction: Treatment of speech disorders during childhood is essential. Many technologies can help speech and language pathologists (SLPs) to practice speech skills, one of which is digital games. This study aimed to systematically investigate the games developed to treat speech disorders and their challenges in children.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35509705 PMCID: PMC9061057 DOI: 10.1155/2022/4814945
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 3.822
Keywords related to game, speech, and children.
| Domain | Keywords |
|---|---|
| Game | (“Video games”[mesh] OR “game” OR “games” OR “gamification” OR “video game” OR “computer games” OR computer game”) |
| Speech | (“Speech therapy”[mesh] OR “speech therapies” OR “therapies, speech” OR “therapy, speech” OR “speech”[mesh] OR “public speaking” OR “speaking, public” OR “speech disorders”[mesh] OR “speech disorder rehabilitation” OR “voice training”[mesh] OR “training, voice” OR “trainings, voice” OR “voice trainings” OR “cleft palate”[mesh] OR “cleft palates” OR “palate, cleft” OR “palates, cleft” OR “stuttering” OR “voice disorders”[mesh] OR “voice disturbance” OR “voice fatigue” OR “voice fatigues” OR “neurologic voice disorder” OR “neurologic voice disorders” OR “articulation disorders”[mesh] OR “phonological impairments” OR “phonological impairment” OR “phonology impairment” OR “phonology impairments” OR “disarticulation disorder” OR “disarticulation disorders” OR “misarticulation” OR “unintelligible articulation” OR “unintelligible articulations”) |
| Children | (“Child”[mesh] OR “children” OR “child, preschool”[mesh] OR “preschool child” OR “children, preschool” OR “preschool children”) |
Figure 1Flow diagram of the literature search and study selection.
Results of quality assessment of articles with JBI checklist.
| Study | Questions | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Final score | |
| Takagi et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N/A | UC | Y | N | Y | 5 (medium) |
| Lopes et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | N | Y | 8 (high) |
| Duval et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | N | N | 7 (high) |
| Zajc et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N/A | UC | UC | Y | Y | 6 (medium) |
| Hair et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 (high) |
| Elhady et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | N | Y | 8 (high) |
| Anjos et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | N | Y | 8 (high) |
| Ahmed et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 (high) |
| Nasiri et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | N | UC | N | Y | 6 (medium) |
| Madeira et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | N | Y | 8 (high) |
| Fardoun et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | UC | UC | N | Y | 6 (medium) |
| Cler et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 (high) |
| Liu et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | N | N | N | Y | 6 (medium) |
| Rubin et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | N | Y | 8 (high) |
| Navarro-Newball et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 (high) |
| Lan et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N/A | UC | N | N | N | 4 (medium) |
| Tan et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | N | N | 6 (medium) |
| King et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 (high) |
| Cagatay et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | N | Y | 7 (high) |
| Rahman et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | UC | N | N | Y | 6 (medium) |
| Frutos et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | N | Y | 7 (high) |
| Umanski et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | N | Y | 7 (high) |
| Hoque et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | Y | N | Y | 8 (high) |
| Bunnell et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | N | N | 6 (medium) |
| Soleymani et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | N | Y | 7 (high) |
| Javkin et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | UC | N | N | N | 5 (medium) |
| Mahshie et al. [ | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N/A | UC | Y | N | Y | 7 (high) |
Y: yes; N: no; UC: unclear; N/A: not applicable.
Figure 2Keyword cooccurrence in VOSviewer software.
The characteristics of reviewed articles.
| Authors, year | Country | Target group | Type of speech skill | Children age ranges | Type of support | Supported language level (phoneme/syllable/word/phrase/sentence) | Type of evaluation | Results of evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Takagi et al. [ | Japan | Children with hearing impairment | (i) Vocalization | Pre-school children | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Word | Not evaluated | Not evaluated |
| Lopes et al. [ | Portugal | Children with dysphonia | (i) Sustained vowel exercise | 4-5 years old | Therapist involved | (i) Phoneme | Test with users | The game gives children the motivation to continuing practicing. |
| Duval et al. [ | USA | Children with developmental disabilities | (i) Articulation | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | (i) Word | Usability evaluation | This study yielded refined functional requirements based on user feedback, relevant reward systems to implement based on user interest, and insights on the preferred hybrid game structure. |
| (ii) Phrase | ||||||||
| (iii) Sentence | ||||||||
| Zajc et al. [ | Slovenia | Children with speech and language disorders | (i) Phonological awareness exercise | 3–12 years old | Not mentioned | (i) Phoneme | Test with users | The game had positive impact on the children's motivation and satisfaction. |
| Hair et al. [ | USA | Children with speech sound disorders | (i) Articulation | 4–12 years old | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Word | Test with users | The results indicate that game successfully engages children and speech exercises. Children are willing to complete the required speech exercises while playing a game they enjoy. |
| Elhady et al. [ | Egypt | Children with dyslalia | (i) Articulation | 7–10 years old | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Word | Test with users/evaluation performance of the speech recognition system | A noticeable progress in children dyslalia appeared with the proposed system/recognition accuracy: 82.1–95.6. |
| Anjos et al. [ | Portugal | Children with speech sound disorders | (i) Articulation | 5–9 years old | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Phoneme | Giving feedback from children and SLP | The feedback from children confirmed that children liked the game. The SLPs showed interest in game and considered it a good method for children training. |
| Ahmed et al. [ | Australia | Children with childhood apraxia of speech and typically developing speech | (i) Articulation | 6–11 years old | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Word | Feasibility study/evaluation performance of the speech recognition system | Children and SLPs found speech-controlled games interesting and fun/ASR accuracy: specificity: 77%; sensitivity: 51%. |
| Nasiri et al. [ | Turkey | Children with speech disorders and hearing problems | (i) Articulation | 2–6 years old | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Word | Not evaluated | Not evaluated |
| Madeira et al. [ | Portugal | Children with phonological disorders | (i) Metaphon therapy | 3–8 years old | Not mentioned | (i) Phoneme | Usability evaluation | Super-Fon's usability was acceptable and very near to a good ranking. |
| (ii) Word | ||||||||
| Fardoun et al. [ | Saudi Arabia | Children with speech difficulties | (i) Respiratory exercises | Not mentioned | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Phoneme | Not evaluated | Not evaluated |
| (ii) Labial exercises | ||||||||
| (iii) Vocalization exercises | ||||||||
| Cler et al. [ | USA | Children with velopharyngeal dysfunction | (i) Nasalization practice | 4–14 years old | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Word | Pilot testing with users | Over 90% of the participants reported that the game was at least “kind of fun” and the equipment was at least “kind of comfortable.” |
| Liu et al. [ | China | Children with hearing impairment | (i) Articulation | Not mentioned | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Word | Usability evaluation | They had an emotional value recovery. |
| (ii) Sentence | ||||||||
| Rubin et al. [ | USA | Children with cleft | (i) Not mentioned | 2–5 years old | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Phoneme | Pilot testing with users | Children enjoyed the game but grew bored due to the delays of phrase-based speech recognition. |
| (ii) Sentence | ||||||||
| Navarro-Newball et al. [ | Colombia | Children with hearing impairment | (i) Articulation | 3–11 years old | Not mentioned | (i) Syllable | Informal summative evaluation for assessing user experience/evaluation performance of the speech recognition system | The results of evaluation showed it to be a suitable tool to maintain the attention and enthusiasm in repetitive tasks. Correct percentage: 80.51 |
| Lan et al. [ | USA | Children with apraxia of speech | (i) Timing and vocal loudness exercise | 4–12 years old | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Pilot testing with users | Results support the feasibility of the game as a speech training tool. |
| Tan et al. [ | Australia | Children with speech disorders | (i) Vocalization | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | (i) Word | Pilot testing with users | The children appear to be engaged and interested in playing. |
| King et al. [ | USA | Children with hyperfunctional voice disorder | (i) Resonance voice exercise | School-age children | Not mentioned | (i) Syllable | Feasibility study | This study found that a purely entertaining video game can be implemented as a voice therapeutic protocol. |
| (ii) Word | ||||||||
| (iii) Phrase | ||||||||
| Cagatay et al. [ | Turkey | Children with speech and language disorders | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Therapist involved | Not mentioned | Pilot testing with users | They showed increasing interest in the game. |
| Rahman et al. [ | Bangladesh | Children with ASD | (i) Making intelligible sounds and correct sentences with words | Not mentioned | Therapist involved | (i) Word | Pilot testing with users | The results indicated the supremacy of gaming method for learning worlds quickly and efficiently. |
| (ii) Sentence | ||||||||
| Frutos et al. [ | Spain | Children with ASD | (i) Articulation | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | (i) Word | Evaluation performance of the speech recognition system | The game had good accuracy (100%). |
| Umanski et al. [ | Netherlands | Children with various speech disorders | (i) Speech rhythm exercise | 4–6 years old | Therapist involved | (i) Syllable | Usability evaluation | The result showed that although the game prototype requires improvement, the initiative is very welcome, and further prototypes will be anticipated. |
| Hoque et al. [ | USA | Children with ASD | (i) Improving speech intelligibility | Not mentioned | Therapist involved | (i) Sentence | Pilot testing with users | Preliminary results demonstrated that the game is engaging and effective. |
| Bunnell et al. [ | USA | Children with articulation problems | (i) Articulation | 4–7 years old | Therapist involved | (i) Syllable | Evaluation performance of the speech recognition system | The difference in log likelihood between /r/ and /w/ models correlates well with perceptual ratings of utterances containing substitution errors but very poorly for correctly articulated examples. |
| (ii) Word | ||||||||
| (iii) Phrase | ||||||||
| Soleymani et al. [ | USA | Children with hearing impairment | (i) Articulation | Young school-aged | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Syllable | Test with users | The system's operation was found to be reliable. |
| Javkin et al. [ | USA | Children with hearing impairment | (i) Articulation | Not mentioned | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Phoneme | Pilot testing with users | The game was proving highly motivating to the children and encouraged them to experiment with their speech production. |
| Mahshie et al. [ | USA | Children with hearing impairment | (i) Sustained vocalization | 3–11 years old | Children can practice with parents at home | (i) Syllable | Test with users | The game was found to be easily incorporated into clinic activities and useful for diagnosis and therapy. |
| (ii) Production of repeated syllables | ||||||||
| (iii) Control of voice intensity and fundamental frequency |
The characteristics of the applied games in the reviewed articles.
| Study | Name of game | Platform | Supported language | Target phonemes | 3D/2D | Game engine | Speech recognition technology or system | Training required to use the game | Frame of the game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Takagi et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) Mobile | Japanese | Not mentioned | 2D | Unity | (i) Julius | Not mentioned |
|
| Lopes et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) PC | Portuguese | /A/, /e/, /i/, /o/, /u/ | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | (i) MFCC | The children were trained. |
|
| Duval et al. [ | SpokeIt | (i) Mobile/iPads | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) PocketSphinx | The children were trained. |
|
| Zajc et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) Mobile | Slovenian | /s/, /z/, /ts/, /sh/, /ʒ/, /ch/ | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Hair et al. [ | Apraxia world | (i) Mobile | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Unity | (i) Wizard of Oz | The children were trained. |
|
| Elhady et al. [ | Kalemni Aktar | (i) PC | Arabic | /s/, /r/ | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | (i) A baseline acoustic model was trained using the Egyptian corpus. | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
| Anjos et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) Mobile/iPads, Android and iOS | Portuguese | /s/, /z/, /sh/, /zh/ | 2D | Unity | (i) MFCC | The children were trained. |
|
| Ahmed et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) Mobile/iOS, Android | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) PocketSphinx (American English) | The children were trained. |
|
| Nasiri et al. [ | Into the Forest | (i) PC | English | Not mentioned | 3D | Unity | (i) Windows UDP Voice Recognition server | Not mentioned |
|
| (ii) Mobile/iOS, Android | |||||||||
| Madeira et al. [ | Super-Fon | (i) Mobile/Android | Portuguese | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Fardoun et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) Mobile | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Cler et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Developed in C# using the .NET 4.5.1 | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Liu et al. [ | NewVoice | (i) Not mentioned | Chinese | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Rubin et al. [ | Speech Adventure | (i) Mobile/iOS, iPad | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Cocos2D | (i) OpenEars | Not mentioned |
|
| Navarro-Newball et al. [ | Talking to Teo | (i) PC | Colombian Spanish | /d/, /t/, /n/, /s/, /l/ | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Perceptual Linear Prediction (PLP) coefficients | Not mentioned |
|
| Lan et al. [ | Flappy Voice | (i) Mobile | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Tan et al. [ | sPeAK-MAN | (i) PC | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Microsoft's XNA Game Studio 4.0 framework | (i) Microsoft Speech SDK | Not mentioned |
|
| King et al. [ | Opera Slinger | (i) PC | English | Plosive or nasal consonant | 3D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | The children were trained. |
|
| Cagatay et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) PC | Turkish | Not mentioned | 3D | Unity | (i) Not mentioned | The children were trained. |
|
| Rahman et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) PC | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Microsoft Speech Engine for English Speech | The children were trained. |
|
| (ii) SDK 5.1, Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5. | |||||||||
| Frutos et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) PC | Spanish and English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) DTW | The children were trained. |
|
| (ii) MFCCs | |||||||||
| (iii) SPHINX4 | |||||||||
| Umanski et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) PC | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Hoque et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) PC | English | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | (i) Sona-Speech's Multidimensional Voice Program (MDVP) | Not mentioned |
|
| (ii) Praat speech processing software | |||||||||
| Bunnell et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) PC | Not mentioned | /r/ | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | (i) Discrete Hidden Markov Model | The children were trained. | Not mentioned |
| Soleymani et al. [ | SIM | (i) PC | English | /a/, /i/, /u/ | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Javkin et al. [ | Not mentioned | (i) PC | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
| Mahshie et al. [ | STS, SPS | (i) PC | English | Not mentioned | 2D | Not mentioned | (i) Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
|
Figure 3The distribution of studies based on the year of publication.
Figure 4The distribution of articles based on countries.
Figure 5Language of designed games for speech therapy.
Figure 6Characteristics of games based on language levels from phoneme to sentence.
Figure 7Distribution of platforms based on target population.
The level of support provided by the games for children with speech disorders.
| Type of support | Frequency | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Children can practice with parents at home | 13 | 48.15 |
| Not mentioned | 8 | 29.63 |
| Therapist involved | 6 | 22.22 |
| Total | 27 | 100 |
Challenges and obstacles of speech therapy games.
| # | Challenges and obstacles | Studies |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sense of frustration and low self-esteem of children due to the lack of voice recognition or progress in playing game | [ |
| 2 | Ambient and environmental noise that affected the game performance | [ |
| 3 | Contradiction between game levels and the needs of target groups (the game was very difficult or too easy) | [ |
| 4 | The game was challenging because it required two hands to play | [ |
| 5 | Children could not easily read words or phrases due to inadequate instruction | [ |
| 6 | Not all participants were willing to wear the headset microphone | [ |
| 7 | Delays in speech recognition | [ |
| 8 | The game did not recognize low tune voices, and children had to speak loudly | [ |
| 9 | The designed game did not provide feedback on accepting or rejecting children's voices | [ |
| 10 | One of the challenges at design phase was that each target phrase or word had to be carefully crafted to fit into the narrative of the game and this was very time-consuming, which could result in minimal content | [ |
| 11 | Negative beliefs of SLP due to unavailability of games for their professional needs | [ |
| 12 | Internet connection restrictions in client-server architectures | [ |
| 13 | The games had no “levels” | [ |
| 14 | The children found the record buttons difficult to manage and required multiple screen taps | [ |
| 15 | Immobility of the system due to Kinect dependence | [ |
| 16 | Different accents led to the lack of voice recognition | [ |
| 17 | The proposed games were heavily dependent on the instructors | [ |
| 18 | Problem in syllable detection in real time | [ |
| 19 | Disagreement between clinician and the game in terms of the correct pronunciation of sounds | [ |
| 20 | Young children could not work with the designed games | [ |