Picture description in the assessment of connected speech intelligibility in Parkinson's disease: A pilot study

Introduction: Assessment of intelligibility in dysarthria tends to rely on oral reading of sentences or words. However, self-generated utterances are closer to a clients’ natural speech. This study investigated how transcription of utterances elicited by picture description can be used in the assessment of intelligibility in speakers with Parkinson’s disease. Methods: Speech samples from eleven speakers with Parkinson’s disease and six neurologically healthy persons were audio-recorded. Forty-two naive listeners completed transcriptions of self-generated sentences from a picture description task and orally read sentences from the Swedish Test of Intelligibility, as well as scaled ratings of narrative speech samples. Results: Intelligibility was higher in orally read than self-generated sentences and higher for content words than for the whole sentence in self-generated sentences for most of the speakers, although these within-group differences were not statistically significant at group level. Adding contextual leads for the listeners increased intelligibility in self-generated utterances significantly, but with individual variation. Although correlations between the intelligibility measures were at least moderate or strong, there was a considerable inter- and intra-speaker variability in intelligibility scores between tasks for the speakers with Parkinson’s disease, indicating individual variation of factors that impact intelligibility. Intelligibility scores from neurologically healthy speakers were generally high across tasks with no significant differences between the conditions. Discussion/Conclusion: Within-speaker variability support literature recommendations to use multiple methods and tasks when assessing intelligibility. The inclusion of transcription of self-generated utterances elicited by picture description to the intelligibility assessment has the potential to provide additional information to assessment methods based on oral reading of pre-scripted sentences, and to inform the planning of interventions.

Perceived gender and client satisfaction in transgender voice work: comparing self and listener rating scales across a training program

Background/Aim: Scales used to collect perceptual ratings related to a speaker’s gender are widely used in gender affirming voice training for trans individuals. Such scales may be used as outcome measures to gain insight into whether training has helped clients meet personal goals related to gender expression. These scales are also widely used in general research investigating the relationship between vocal characteristics and perceptions of speaker gender. However, past studies in these areas have varied in the terminology used to label rating scales and the impact of this variation is currently unknown. Additionally, research has not yet fully explored the relationship between self- and listener-ratings of trans participant voices and trans participant satisfaction with voice, and whether or not these relationships change after trans participants undertake gender affirming voice training. This research paper aimed to explore these relationships and address these research gaps. Methods: A group of 34 trans participants were asked to rate their voices before and after participating in gender affirming voice training. Trans participant voice samples from before and after training were also presented to a group of 25 listeners for rating. Perceptual ratings were made on two Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) with anchors ‘very feminine/very masculine’ and ‘very female/very male’. Trans participants also rated their satisfaction with their current voice on a VAS with anchors ‘very satisfied/very unsatisfied’. Correlation coefficients were calculated to investigate the relationship between collected ratings. Results: Differences in scale labels were found to have minimal impact on ratings made by both trans participants and listeners. Trans participant self-ratings were found to correlate with listener ratings, but this correlation was not strong Trans participant self-ratings had a consistently stronger relationship with their self-rated vocal satisfaction. The study contributed new findings that these differences may be more pronounced after trans participants have completed voice training. Discussion/conclusion: This study suggests that results from past studies that have used differently labelled scales to collect ratings related to gender perception based on voice are suitable to compare. This study also discusses the implications reported differences between trans participant self-ratings and listener ratings may have for research and clinical practice.

Linguistic Relevance and Applicability of the Spanish VHI-10 in a Population Outside Spain

Introduction: The Voice Handicap Index 10 (VHI-10) has been translated to many languages. There are substantial differences between the translation methods. Translated questionnaires without appropriate linguistic validation may not capture cultural differences or be understood by the participants in the manner intended by the original developers. This also holds true between dialects within a language. There are two versions of the VHI-10 in Spanish, both translated in Spain. Considering the cultural and dialectical differences amongst Spanish speakers, it is hypothesized that these translations may not be applicable globally. The purpose of this study was to determine the linguistic relevance and applicability of the currently available versions of the VHI-10 in Spanish amongst Spanish speakers outside of Spain. Methods: This study used mixed methods qualitative and quantitative procedures consisting of semi-structured interviews and quantitative analysis of data. Sixty-nine participants met the inclusion criteria. Participants with and without a diagnosis of dysphonia were included. Demographic data collected included age, gender, cultural/dialectical background, level of education, and number of years residing in Southern California. Participants were provided the currently available translated versions of the VHI-10 in Spanish (V1 and V2). After reading both questionnaires, a semi-structured interview was conducted by a bilingual SLP. Semi-structured interview responses were coded to determine patterns of words marked as problematic/not understood or non-representative of the Spanish dialect spoken by the participants. Results: The majority of participants marked at least one word in both versions as problematic/not understood or non-representative of the Spanish dialect spoken (60/69, 87.0% for V1 and 63/69, 92.3%, for V2). The two words most frequently marked as problematic/not understood or non-representative of the Spanish dialect spoken were “hándicap” (marked by 51/69 participants, 73.9%) and “minusvalía” (marked by 52/69 participants, 75.4%). Conclusions: Data analysis demonstrates that the majority of participants marked words as not understood/non-representative of their dialect on either V1 or V2. One question not understood or not answered could have an impact on how we interpret this PRO measure in clinical practice. Use of currently available Spanish translations of the VHI-10 may yield unreliable results when used amongst Spanish speakers outside Spain due to dialectal and cultural differences. Future work will include validation of a voice patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure that is culturally and linguistically appropriate for Spanish speakers outside Spain.

Nasalance Scores as a Function of Skeletal Malocclusion of English-Speaking Adults in the North Indian Population

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> The objective of this study is quantitative assessment of nasalance for skeletal Class I (normative values), Class II, and III malocclusion in the English language for the North Indian population and to compare the normative values with the nasalance scores obtained from individuals with skeletal Class II and III malocclusion and to evaluate the normative values as a function of gender. <b><i>Material and Methods:</i></b> The study was conducted on a total sample of 200 patients with 100, 50, and 50 in group 1 (control group, Skeletal Class I), group 2 (Skeletal Class II), and group 3 (Skeletal Class III), respectively. ANB angle (anteroposterior angle formed by point A, nasion, and point B) measured on lateral cephalogram was used to categorize the patients into 3 groups. The normative nasalance scores were compared for males and females in the control group. The nasalance scores of skeletal Class II and III subjects were compared to the combined normative scores of the control group. The NasalView was used for the objective assessment of nasalance. Oral syllables (/pa/and/pi/), nasal syllables (/ma/and/mi/), and 3 passages (Zoo passage, Rainbow passage, and Nasal sentences) were used to determine the nasalance scores. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The intragroup comparison of nasalance scores in group 1 showed statistically significant differences for different stimuli. The gender-related comparison showed no statistically significant differences in nasalance scores. The intergroup comparison of nasalance scores for skeletal malocclusion showed no statistically significant differences for different stimuli except statistically significant lower nasalance values for nasal sentences in group 3 compared to the control group. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The study concluded that the nasalance scores for nasal sentences in skeletal Class III malocclusion were significantly lower than in the control group and were not statistically significant between the 3 groups for all other stimuli.