Skip to content

Perceptual Training to Improve Listeners' Ability to Understand Speech Produced by Individuals With Dysarthria

Perceptual Training for Improved Intelligibility of Dysarthric Speech

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04897711
Enrollment
217
Registered
2021-05-21
Start date
2021-04-26
Completion date
2023-07-01
Last updated
2024-09-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Dysarthria, Intelligibility, Speech

Keywords

dysarthria, motor speech disorders, intelligibility, perceptual training

Brief summary

There exist very few effective treatments that ease the intelligibility burden of dysarthria. Perceptual training offers a promising avenue for improving intelligibility of dysarthric speech by offsetting the communicative burden from the speaker with dysarthria on to their primary communication partners-family, friends, and caregivers. This project, utilizing advanced explanatory models, will permit identification of speaker and listener parameters, and their interactions, that allow perceptual training paradigms to be optimized for intelligibility outcomes in dysarthria rehabilitation. This work addresses this critical gap in clinical practice and sets the stage for extension of dysarthria management to listener-targeted remediation-advancing clinical practice and enhanced communication and quality of life outcomes for this population.

Detailed description

There exist very few effective treatments that ease the intelligibility burden of dysarthria, and all of these require cognitive and physical effort on the part of the speaker to achieve and maintain gains. Therefore, individuals with intelligibility deficits whose cognitive and physical impairments limit their ability to modify their speech are currently not viable treatment candidates. This constitutes a significant health disparity that disproportionately affects those clinical populations with developmental, cognitive, and/or significant neuromuscular impairment. To address this critical gap in current dysarthria management, the weight of behavioral change is shifted from the speaker to the listener. While a novel concept for dysarthria management, the idea is firmly rooted in the field of psycholinguistics and supported by a programmatic body of research showing that listener-targeted perceptual training paradigms (wherein listeners are familiarized with the degraded speech signal and provided with an orthographic transcription of what the speaker is saying) result in statistically and clinically significant intelligibility gains in dysarthria. Further, preliminary evidence suggests that these intelligibility outcomes may be influenced by hypothesis-driven speaker parameters, such as acoustic predictability of speech rhythm cues, and listener parameters, such as expertise in rhythm perception. A requisite next step to bringing listener-targeted perceptual training closer to clinical implementation, and the overarching goal of this clinical trial, is the systematic and rigorous analysis of the speaker and listener parameters, and their interactions, that modulate, and in some cases optimize, perceptual training benefits of intelligibility improvement. To achieve this aim, an existing database of dysarthric speech (20 speakers with dysarthria) and a large cohort of listeners (n = 400) across two well-established testing sites, Utah State University and Florida State University are utilized. Thus, the key deliverable resulting from this work will be explanatory models that account for the unique and joint contributions of speaker and listener parameters on the magnitude of intelligibility improvement following perceptual training with dysarthric speech.

Interventions

Each listener is familiarized/trained with a single speaker with dysarthria. Pretest/posttest transcription data will be used to build explanatory models of intelligibility improvement.

Sponsors

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
CollaboratorNIH
Utah State University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

300 listeners will be recruited and enrolled. Each participant will be randomly assigned to receive perceptual training with one of 5 speakers with dysarthria, such that 30-50 listeners will be assigned to each speaker with dysarthria. All listener participants will receive the perceptual training intervention.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

\*Native speakers of American English

Exclusion criteria

* No self-reported history of speech impairment * No self-reported history of language impairment * No self-reported history of cognitive impairment

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pretest Transcription AccuracyAll outcomes were collected during a single data collection session, that lasted no more than 90 minutes. Pretest transcription accuracy is assessed at the pretest, immediately before a single session of perceptual training.A percentage words correct (PWC) score is tabulated for each listener at pretest. A higher score reflects greater speaker intelligibility (i.e., understanding).
Posttest Transcription AccuracyAll outcomes were collected during a single data collection session, lasting no longer than 90 minutes. Transcription accuracy at posttest was assessed at posttest, immediately after perceptual training.A percentage words correct (PWC) score is tabulated for each listener at posttest. Higher scores reflect greater speaker intelligibility (i.e., understanding).

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Due to COVID-19 limitations at the time of recruitment, initial efforts were focused on recruiting participants 18-50 years. We recruited participants from the Tallahassee, FL and Logan, UT communities. In the later stages of this project, we focused recruitment efforts on older participants aged 55-80 years from the Tallahassee community.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 1
To examine the effect of perceptual training with speakers with dysarthria, we use a standard three-phase perceptual training protocol involving pretest, training, and posttest phases, in which speech samples from a single speaker with mixed flaccid-spastic dysarthria due to ALS (Speaker 1) are utilized for all three phases. Perceptual Training: Each listener is familiarized/trained with a single speaker with dysarthria. Pretest/posttest transcription data will be used to build explanatory models of intelligibility improvement.
49
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 2
To examine the effect of perceptual training with speakers with dysarthria, we use a standard three-phase perceptual training protocol involving pretest, training, and posttest phases, in which speech samples from a single speaker with ataxic dysarthria due to cerebellar degeneration (Speaker 2) are utilized for all three phases. Perceptual Training: Each listener is familiarized/trained with a single speaker with dysarthria. Pretest/posttest transcription data will be used to build explanatory models of intelligibility improvement.
54
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 3
To examine the effect of perceptual training with speakers with dysarthria, we use a standard three-phase perceptual training protocol involving pretest, training, and posttest phases, in which speech samples from a single speaker with hypokinetic dysarthria due to Parkinson's disease (Speaker 3) are utilized for all three phases. Perceptual Training: Each listener is familiarized/trained with a single speaker with dysarthria. Pretest/posttest transcription data will be used to build explanatory models of intelligibility improvement.
53
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 4
To examine the effect of perceptual training with speakers with dysarthria, we use a standard three-phase perceptual training protocol involving pretest, training, and posttest phases, in which speech samples from a single speaker with ataxic dysarthria due to cerebellar degeneration (Speaker 4) are utilized for all three phases. Perceptual Training: Each listener is familiarized/trained with a single speaker with dysarthria. Pretest/posttest transcription data will be used to build explanatory models of intelligibility improvement.
32
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 5
To examine the effect of perceptual training with speakers with dysarthria, we use a standard three-phase perceptual training protocol involving pretest, training, and posttest phases, in which speech samples from a single speaker with hypokinetic dysarthria due to Parkinson's disease (Speaker 5) are utilized for all three phases. Perceptual Training: Each listener is familiarized/trained with a single speaker with dysarthria. Pretest/posttest transcription data will be used to build explanatory models of intelligibility improvement.
27
Total215

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPerceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 2Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 3Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 4Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 1Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 5Total
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants25 Participants0 Participants25 Participants50 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
54 Participants53 Participants7 Participants49 Participants2 Participants165 Participants
Age, Continuous22.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.3
21.5 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.9
69.28 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.95
22.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.3
70.22 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.93
35 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 22
Cognitive flexibility107 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15
104 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17
113 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17
104 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15
114 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17
107 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
8 Participants12 Participants0 Participants10 Participants0 Participants30 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
46 Participants41 Participants32 Participants39 Participants27 Participants185 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Inhibitory control94 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15
90 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17
98 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11
93 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14
96 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13
94 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15
Processing speed115 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 19
114 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 19
100 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 19
111 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 21
100 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 20
110 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 20
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants4 Participants0 Participants4 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
4 Participants3 Participants0 Participants1 Participants3 Participants11 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants0 Participants1 Participants3 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
49 Participants49 Participants32 Participants44 Participants23 Participants197 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
43 Participants43 Participants20 Participants37 Participants20 Participants163 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
11 Participants10 Participants12 Participants12 Participants7 Participants52 Participants
Vocabulary Knowledge108 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12
110 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12
112 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10
105 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14
112 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12
109 Scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13
Words-in-Noise5.28 decibels
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.5
4.8 decibels
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.1
7.9 decibels
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.3
5.6 decibels
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.7
8.2 decibels
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.2
6.4 decibels
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.3
Working memory104 scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10
102 scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13
104 scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15
104 scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12
109 scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17
104 scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
EG003
affected / at risk
EG004
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 490 / 540 / 530 / 320 / 27
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 490 / 540 / 530 / 320 / 27
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 490 / 540 / 530 / 320 / 27

Outcome results

Primary

Posttest Transcription Accuracy

A percentage words correct (PWC) score is tabulated for each listener at posttest. Higher scores reflect greater speaker intelligibility (i.e., understanding).

Time frame: All outcomes were collected during a single data collection session, lasting no longer than 90 minutes. Transcription accuracy at posttest was assessed at posttest, immediately after perceptual training.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 1Posttest Transcription Accuracy84.4 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 3.6
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 2Posttest Transcription Accuracy50 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 7.1
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 3Posttest Transcription Accuracy57.8 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 7.8
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 4Posttest Transcription Accuracy42.2 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 12.7
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 5Posttest Transcription Accuracy51.2 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 14.8
Primary

Pretest Transcription Accuracy

A percentage words correct (PWC) score is tabulated for each listener at pretest. A higher score reflects greater speaker intelligibility (i.e., understanding).

Time frame: All outcomes were collected during a single data collection session, that lasted no more than 90 minutes. Pretest transcription accuracy is assessed at the pretest, immediately before a single session of perceptual training.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 1Pretest Transcription Accuracy77.8 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 5.4
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 2Pretest Transcription Accuracy35.3 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 7.7
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 3Pretest Transcription Accuracy52.9 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 7.1
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 4Pretest Transcription Accuracy30 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 10.6
Perceptual Training With Dysarthric Speaker 5Pretest Transcription Accuracy49.2 percentage of words correctStandard Deviation 15.4

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026