Speech Metrics and Samples That Differentiate between Nonfluent/Agrammatic and Logopenic Variants of Primary Progressive Aphasia

Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige

Trefferliste

Autor/inn/en	Haley, Katarina L.; Jacks, Adam; Jarrett, Jordan; Ray, Taylor; Cunningham, Kevin T.; Gorno-Tempini, Maria Luisa; Henry, Maya L.
Titel	Speech Metrics and Samples That Differentiate between Nonfluent/Agrammatic and Logopenic Variants of Primary Progressive Aphasia
Quelle	In: Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 64 (2021) 3, S.754-775 (22 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Haley, Katarina L.) ORCID (Jacks, Adam) ORCID (Cunningham, Kevin T.) ORCID (Henry, Maya L.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1092-4388
Schlagwörter	Speech Communication; Aphasia; Intonation; Suprasegmentals; Clinical Diagnosis; Speech Evaluation; Classification; Evaluation Criteria; Semantics; Task Analysis; Pictorial Stimuli; Story Telling; Narration; Acoustics; Phonetics; Speech Impairments; Phonemes; Measures (Individuals); Syllables; Accuracy; Psychomotor Skills; Connected Discourse; Correlation; Memory; Verbal Ability; Verbal Tests; Verbal Learning; Vocabulary; Intelligence Tests; Short Term Memory; Cognitive Tests; Symptoms (Individual Disorders); Severity (of Disability); Error Analysis (Language); California Verbal Learning Test for Children; Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test; Digit Span Test + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Expressive Aphasie; Aphasie; Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem; Semantik; Aufgabenanalyse; Fantasieanregung; Akustik; Phonetik; Fonetik; Speech impairment; Speech handicap; Speech handicaps; Language handicps; Language impairments; Sprachbehinderung; Fonem; Messdaten; Silbe; Psychomotorische Aktivität; Korrelation; Gedächtnis; Mündliche Leistung; Mündliche Prüfung; Verbales Lernen; Wortschatz; Intelligence test; Intelligenztest; Kurzzeitgedächtnis; Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest; Psychiatrische Symptomatik; Schweregrad; Error analysis; Language; Fehleranalyse
Abstract	Purpose: Of the three currently recognized variants of primary progressive aphasia, behavioral differentiation between the nonfluent/agrammatic (nfvPPA) and logopenic (lvPPA) variants is particularly difficult. The challenge includes uncertainty regarding diagnosis of apraxia of speech, which is subsumed within criteria for variant classification. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which a variety of speech articulation and prosody metrics for apraxia of speech differentiate between nfvPPA and lvPPA across diverse speech samples. Method: The study involved 25 participants with progressive aphasia (10 with nfvPPA, 10 with lvPPA, and five with the semantic variant). Speech samples included a word repetition task, a picture description task, and a story narrative task. We completed acoustic analyses of temporal prosody and quantitative perceptual analyses based on narrow phonetic transcription and then evaluated the degree of differentiation between nfvPPA and lvPPA participants (with the semantic variant serving as a reference point for minimal speech production impairment). Results: Most, but not all, articulatory and prosodic metrics differentiated statistically between the nfvPPA and lvPPA groups. Measures of distortion frequency, syllable duration, syllable scanning, and--to a limited extent--syllable stress and phonemic accuracy showed greater impairment in the nfvPPA group. Contrary to expectations, classification was most accurate in connected speech samples. A customized connected speech metric--the narrative syllable duration--yielded excellent to perfect classification accuracy. Discussion: Measures of average syllable duration in multisyllabic utterances are useful diagnostic tools for differentiating between nfvPPA and lvPPA, particularly when based on connected speech samples. As such, they are suitable candidates for automatization, large-scale study, and application to clinical practice. The observation that both speech rate and distortion frequency differentiated more effectively in connected speech than on a motor speech examination suggests that it will be important to evaluate interactions between speech and discourse production in future research. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. 2200 Research Blvd #250, Rockville, MD 20850. Tel: 301-296-5700; Fax: 301-296-8580; e-mail: slhr@asha.org; Web site: http://jslhr.pubs.asha.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01