Speech Sound DisorderPhase 1C-RESULTS TPTNCT04625062
Comparing Traditional and Biofeedback Telepractice Treatment for Residual Speech Errors
A Phase 1 study testing Visual-acoustic biofeedback and Motor-based treatment in people with Speech Sound Disorder, run by New York University at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
This study aims to evaluate the relative efficacy of biofeedback and traditional treatment for residual speech errors when both are delivered via telepractice. In a single-case randomization design, up to eight children with RSE will receive both visual-acoustic biofeedback and traditional treatment via telepractice. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 9 to 15 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Speech Sound Disorder
- What is being tested?
- Visual-acoustic biofeedback and Motor-based treatment
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 7 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Sep 2020to 18 Mar 2021
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 9 to 15 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Must be between 9;0 and 15;11 years of age at the time of enrollment.
- Must speak English as the dominant language (i.e., must have begun learning English by age 2, per parent report).
- Must speak a rhotic dialect of English.
- Must pass a brief examination of oral structure and function.
- Must exhibit less than thirty percent accuracy, based on trained listener ratings, on a probe list eliciting /r/ in various phonetic contexts at the word level.
Who cannot join
- Must not receive a T score more than 1.3 standard deviations (SD) below the mean on the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence-2 (WASI-2) Matrix Reasoning.
- Must not receive a scaled score below 6 on the CELF-5 Recalling Sentences or Formulated Sentences subtests.
- Must not have history of sensorineural hearing loss or failed infant hearing screening.
- Must not have an existing diagnosis of developmental disability, major neurobehavioral syndrome such as cerebral palsy, Down Syndrome, or Autism Spectrum Disorder, or major neural disorder (e.g., epilepsy, agenesis of the corpus callosum) or insult (e.g., traumatic brain injury, stroke, or tumor resection).
- Must not show clinically significant signs of apraxia of speech or dysarthria.
- Must not have major orthodontia that could interfere with tongue-palate contact.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
Montclair State University
Bloomfield, New Jersey, 07003
Syracuse University
Syracuse, New York, 13244
About this study
Official title: Comparing Traditional and Biofeedback Treatment for Residual Speech Errors Via Telepractice
This study aims to evaluate the relative efficacy of biofeedback and traditional treatment for residual speech errors when both are delivered via telepractice. In a single-case randomization design, up to eight children with RSE will receive both visual-acoustic biofeedback and traditional treatment via telepractice. Acoustic measures of within-session change will be compared across sessions randomly assigned to each condition. It is hypothesized that participants will exhibit a clinically significant overall treatment response and that short-term measures of change will indicate that biofeedback is associated with larger increments of progress than traditional treatment.
Read the detailed description
The COVID-19 crisis has forced speech-language pathologists to migrate from in-person delivery of speech treatment services to remote delivery via telepractice. This study will compare the efficacy of visual-acoustic biofeedback treatment versus non-biofeedback treatment in this setting. Specifically, participants will receive both visual-acoustic biofeedback treatment and non-biofeedback treatment via telepractice (Zoom call with screen-sharing) in a single-case randomization design. The hypothesis of interest is that sessions featuring visual-acoustic biofeedback will be associated with larger short-term gains than sessions featuring non-biofeedback treatment. To test this hypothesis, the study team will recruit up to 8 participants who will receive an initial treatment orientation followed by an equal dose of both types of treatment (10 sessions of visual-acoustic biofeedback and 10 sessions of non-biofeedback treatment). Participants will complete approximately two sessions per week via telepractice; each week will feature one session of each type, randomly ordered. They will also complete 4 pre-treatment baseline sessions and 3 post-treatment maintenance sessions to evaluate the overall magnitude of change over the course of treatment.
- Conditions
- Speech Sound Disorder
- Being tested
- Visual-acoustic biofeedback, Motor-based treatment
- Keywords
- speech, articulation, motor development
- Medical subject headings
- Speech Sound Disorder, Speech
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Visual-acoustic biofeedbackBehavioural
In visual-acoustic biofeedback treatment, participants view a dynamic display of the speech signal in the form of a real-time LPC (Linear Predictive Coding) spectrum. Because correct vs incorrect productions of /r/ contrast acoustically in the frequency of the third formant (F3), participants were cued to make their real-time LPC spectrum match a visual target characterized by a low F3 frequency.
Motor-based treatmentBehavioural
Motor-based articulation treatment involves providing auditory models and verbal descriptions of correct articulator placement, then cueing repetitive motor practice. Images and diagrams of the vocal tract were used as visual aids; however, no real-time visual display of articulatory or acoustic information will be made available.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Visual-acoustic biofeedback | Experimental | Visual- acoustic biofeedback treatment (behavioral) administered via telepractice Receives: Behavioral: Visual-acoustic biofeedback |
| Motor-based treatment | Experimental | Motor-based articulation treatment administered via telepractice Receives: Behavioral: Motor-based treatment |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Within-session Change in Percentage of "Correct" Ratings by Blinded Naive Listeners for /r/ Sounds Produced in Word Probes
To assess /r/ production accuracy, participants read probe lists eliciting 25 utterances of /r/ in various phonetic contexts at the start and end of each treatment session. Recorded probe words are presented in randomized order for binary rating (correct/incorrect) by naive listeners who are blind to treatment condition and time point; the accuracy of each token is quantified as the percentage of "correct" ratings across 9 blinded listeners. We then compute the mean percent correct ratings for each probe; the change in this value from pre to post session ("within-session change") is our outcome measure of interest. Summary statistics report the mean and standard deviation of within-session change for each treatment condition, pooled across participants and sessions. This Outcome Measure is assessed using a two-tailed paired-samples t-test comparing mean change in percent correct for each treatment condition across subjects. Outcomes are evaluated relative to a superiority criterion.
Measured: Change in word probe accuracy was measured in each treatment session, which were administered over ten weeks.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted12 Nov 2020
- Study start1 Sep 2020
- Primary completion18 Mar 2021
- Study completion18 Mar 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Speech Sound DisorderStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- In this within-subjects single-case randomization design, each participant will receive an equal number of sessions of visual-acoustic biofeedback and traditional treatment (n = 10 each), with randomized allocation of treatment types to individual sessions. Randomization will be blocked, with each week of treatment serving as a block; within each week/block, one session will be randomly assigned to feature visual-acoustic and one to feature traditional treatment.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 7 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- New York University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Syracuse University, Montclair State University, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04625062
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- C-RESULTS-TPT
- Other IDs
- R01DC017476
- Acronym
- C-RESULTS TPT
- Status last verified
- Nov 2020
- First submitted
- 8 Sep 2020
- Last updated
- 13 Feb 2023
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Dugan SH, Silbert N, McAllister T, Preston JL, Sotto C, Boyce SE. Modelling category goodness judgments in children with residual sound errors. Clin Linguist Phon. 2019;33(4):295-315. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2018.1477834. Epub 2018 May 24.
PubMed 29792525Campbell H, Harel D, Hitchcock E, McAllister Byun T. Selecting an acoustic correlate for automated measurement of American English rhotic production in children. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018 Nov;20(6):635-643. doi: 10.1080/17549507.2017.1359334. Epub 2017 Aug 10.
PubMed 28795872Campbell H, McAllister Byun T. Deriving individualised /r/ targets from the acoustics of children's non-rhotic vowels. Clin Linguist Phon. 2018;32(1):70-87. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2017.1330898. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
PubMed 28703653McAllister Byun T. Efficacy of Visual-Acoustic Biofeedback Intervention for Residual Rhotic Errors: A Single-Subject Randomization Study. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 May 24;60(5):1175-1193. doi: 10.1044/2016_JSLHR-S-16-0038.
PubMed 28389677McAllister Byun T, Tiede M. Perception-production relations in later development of American English rhotics. PLoS One. 2017 Feb 16;12(2):e0172022. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172022. eCollection 2017.
PubMed 28207800McAllister Byun T, Campbell H. Differential Effects of Visual-Acoustic Biofeedback Intervention for Residual Speech Errors. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016 Nov 11;10:567. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00567. eCollection 2016.
PubMed 27891084McAllister Byun T, Halpin PF, Szeredi D. Online crowdsourcing for efficient rating of speech: a validation study. J Commun Disord. 2015 Jan-Feb;53:70-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.11.003. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
PubMed 25578293Harel D, Hitchcock ER, Szeredi D, Ortiz J, McAllister Byun T. Finding the experts in the crowd: Validity and reliability of crowdsourced measures of children's gradient speech contrasts. Clin Linguist Phon. 2017;31(1):104-117. doi: 10.3109/02699206.2016.1174306. Epub 2016 Jun 7.
PubMed 27267258Hitchcock ER, Harel D, Byun TM. Social, Emotional, and Academic Impact of Residual Speech Errors in School-Aged Children: A Survey Study. Semin Speech Lang. 2015 Nov;36(4):283-94. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1562911. Epub 2015 Oct 12.
PubMed 26458203Byun TM, Hitchcock ER. Investigating the use of traditional and spectral biofeedback approaches to intervention for /r/ misarticulation. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Aug;21(3):207-21. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0083). Epub 2012 Mar 21.
PubMed 22442281
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Feb 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparing Traditional and Biofeedback Treatment for Residual Speech Errors Via Telepractice
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04625062
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- C-RESULTS TPT / C-RESULTS-TPT
- Conditions
- Speech Sound Disorder
- Keywords
- speech, articulation, motor development
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 7 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- New York UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Syracuse University, Montclair State University, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
- Study start
- 1 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 18 Mar 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 18 Mar 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 12 Nov 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 13 Feb 2023
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to evaluate the relative efficacy of biofeedback and traditional treatment for residual speech errors when both are delivered via telepractice. In a single-case randomization design, up to eight children with RSE will receive both visual-acoustic biofeedback and traditional treatment via telepractice. Acoustic measures of within-session change will be compared across sessions randomly assigned to each condition. It is hypothesized that participants will exhibit a clinically significant overall treatment response and that short-term measures of change will indicate that biofeedback is associated with larger increments of progress than traditional treatment.
Detailed description
The COVID-19 crisis has forced speech-language pathologists to migrate from in-person delivery of speech treatment services to remote delivery via telepractice. This study will compare the efficacy of visual-acoustic biofeedback treatment versus non-biofeedback treatment in this setting. Specifically, participants will receive both visual-acoustic biofeedback treatment and non-biofeedback treatment via telepractice (Zoom call with screen-sharing) in a single-case randomization design. The hypothesis of interest is that sessions featuring visual-acoustic biofeedback will be associated with larger short-term gains than sessions featuring non-biofeedback treatment. To test this hypothesis, the study team will recruit up to 8 participants who will receive an initial treatment orientation followed by an equal dose of both types of treatment (10 sessions of visual-acoustic biofeedback and 10 sessions of non-biofeedback treatment). Participants will complete approximately two sessions per week via telepractice; each week will feature one session of each type, randomly ordered. They will also complete 4 pre-treatment baseline sessions and 3 post-treatment maintenance sessions to evaluate the overall magnitude of change over the course of treatment.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- In this within-subjects single-case randomization design, each participant will receive an equal number of sessions of visual-acoustic biofeedback and traditional treatment (n = 10 each), with randomized allocation of treatment types to individual sessions. Randomization will be blocked, with each week of treatment serving as a block; within each week/block, one session will be randomly assigned to feature visual-acoustic and one to feature traditional treatment.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Visual-acoustic biofeedback | Experimental | Behavioral: Visual-acoustic biofeedbackVisual- acoustic biofeedback treatment (behavioral) administered via telepractice |
| Motor-based treatment | Experimental | Behavioral: Motor-based treatmentMotor-based articulation treatment administered via telepractice |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 9 to 15 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Must be between 9;0 and 15;11 years of age at the time of enrollment.
- Must speak English as the dominant language (i.e., must have begun learning English by age 2, per parent report).
- Must speak a rhotic dialect of English.
- Must pass a brief examination of oral structure and function.
- Must exhibit less than thirty percent accuracy, based on trained listener ratings, on a probe list eliciting /r/ in various phonetic contexts at the word level.
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Must not receive a T score more than 1.3 standard deviations (SD) below the mean on the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence-2 (WASI-2) Matrix Reasoning.
- Must not receive a scaled score below 6 on the CELF-5 Recalling Sentences or Formulated Sentences subtests.
- Must not have history of sensorineural hearing loss or failed infant hearing screening.
- Must not have an existing diagnosis of developmental disability, major neurobehavioral syndrome such as cerebral palsy, Down Syndrome, or Autism Spectrum Disorder, or major neural disorder (e.g., epilepsy, agenesis of the corpus callosum) or insult (e.g., traumatic brain injury, stroke, or tumor resection).
- Must not show clinically significant signs of apraxia of speech or dysarthria.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Visual-acoustic biofeedbackIn visual-acoustic biofeedback treatment, participants view a dynamic display of the speech signal in the form of a real-time LPC (Linear Predictive Coding) spectrum. Because correct vs incorrect productions of /r/ contrast acoustically in the frequency of the third formant (F3), participants were cued to make their real-time LPC spectrum match a visual target characterized by a low F3 frequency. | Behavioural | Visual-acoustic biofeedback |
| Motor-based treatmentMotor-based articulation treatment involves providing auditory models and verbal descriptions of correct articulator placement, then cueing repetitive motor practice. Images and diagrams of the vocal tract were used as visual aids; however, no real-time visual display of articulatory or acoustic information will be made available. | Behavioural | Motor-based treatment |
Primary outcome
Within-session Change in Percentage of "Correct" Ratings by Blinded Naive Listeners for /r/ Sounds Produced in Word Probes
Time frame: Change in word probe accuracy was measured in each treatment session, which were administered over ten weeks.
To assess /r/ production accuracy, participants read probe lists eliciting 25 utterances of /r/ in various phonetic contexts at the start and end of each treatment session. Recorded probe words are presented in randomized order for binary rating (correct/incorrect) by naive listeners who are blind to treatment condition and time point; the accuracy of each token is quantified as the percentage of "correct" ratings across 9 blinded listeners. We then compute the mean percent correct ratings for each probe; the change in this value from pre to post session ("within-session change") is our outcome measure of interest. Summary statistics report the mean and standard deviation of within-session change for each treatment condition, pooled across participants and sessions. This Outcome Measure is assessed using a two-tailed paired-samples t-test comparing mean change in percent correct for each treatment condition across subjects. Outcomes are evaluated relative to a superiority criterion.
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Feb 2023.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 29792525Dugan SH, Silbert N, McAllister T, Preston JL, Sotto C, Boyce SE. Modelling category goodness judgments in children with residual sound errors. Clin Linguist Phon. 2019;33(4):295-315. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2018.1477834. Epub 2018 May 24.
- Background: PubMed 28795872Campbell H, Harel D, Hitchcock E, McAllister Byun T. Selecting an acoustic correlate for automated measurement of American English rhotic production in children. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018 Nov;20(6):635-643. doi: 10.1080/17549507.2017.1359334. Epub 2017 Aug 10.
- Background: PubMed 28703653Campbell H, McAllister Byun T. Deriving individualised /r/ targets from the acoustics of children's non-rhotic vowels. Clin Linguist Phon. 2018;32(1):70-87. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2017.1330898. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
- Background: PubMed 28389677McAllister Byun T. Efficacy of Visual-Acoustic Biofeedback Intervention for Residual Rhotic Errors: A Single-Subject Randomization Study. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 May 24;60(5):1175-1193. doi: 10.1044/2016_JSLHR-S-16-0038.
- Background: PubMed 28207800McAllister Byun T, Tiede M. Perception-production relations in later development of American English rhotics. PLoS One. 2017 Feb 16;12(2):e0172022. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172022. eCollection 2017.
- Background: PubMed 27891084McAllister Byun T, Campbell H. Differential Effects of Visual-Acoustic Biofeedback Intervention for Residual Speech Errors. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016 Nov 11;10:567. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00567. eCollection 2016.
- Background: PubMed 25578293McAllister Byun T, Halpin PF, Szeredi D. Online crowdsourcing for efficient rating of speech: a validation study. J Commun Disord. 2015 Jan-Feb;53:70-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.11.003. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
- Background: PubMed 27267258Harel D, Hitchcock ER, Szeredi D, Ortiz J, McAllister Byun T. Finding the experts in the crowd: Validity and reliability of crowdsourced measures of children's gradient speech contrasts. Clin Linguist Phon. 2017;31(1):104-117. doi: 10.3109/02699206.2016.1174306. Epub 2016 Jun 7.
- Background: PubMed 26458203Hitchcock ER, Harel D, Byun TM. Social, Emotional, and Academic Impact of Residual Speech Errors in School-Aged Children: A Survey Study. Semin Speech Lang. 2015 Nov;36(4):283-94. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1562911. Epub 2015 Oct 12.
- Background: PubMed 22442281Byun TM, Hitchcock ER. Investigating the use of traditional and spectral biofeedback approaches to intervention for /r/ misarticulation. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Aug;21(3):207-21. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0083). Epub 2012 Mar 21.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Speech Sound Disorder
Recruiting
Feasibility and Preliminary Effects of a Therapeutic Approach Using Ultrasound Visual Biofeedback in Children With AFI: a Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.
Childhood Apraxia of Speech, Speech Sound Disorders
Recruiting
Improving Spatial Perception and Speech Understanding in Multitalker Mixtures
Hearing Loss
Recruiting
BiOfeedback, Online for Sibilant Treatment
Speech Sound Disorder
Recruiting
Online Rotating Delivery of Perception/Production Enhanced Treatment for Rhotics
Speech Sound Disorder
Recruiting
High-intensity vs Low-intensity Speech Intervention in Children With Phonological Speech Sound Disorders
Speech Therapy, Speech Disorders in Children
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 1 study testing Visual-acoustic biofeedback and Motor-based treatment in people with Speech Sound Disorder, run by New York University at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Feb 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 1 studies test a treatment in a small group of people for the first time or in a new way, mainly to check safety and find the right dose.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 13 Feb 2023). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Within-session Change in Percentage of "Correct" Ratings by Blinded Naive Listeners for /r/ Sounds Produced in Word Probes (time frame: Change in word probe accuracy was measured in each treatment session, which were administered over ten weeks.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04625062, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Feb 2023.