MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530499581 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs73-4201616169

THE PREVALENCE OF STUTTERING, VOICE DISORDER, AND SPEECH SOUND DISORDERS IN PRESCHOOLERS IN SHAHREKORD, IRAN

2016· article· en· W2530499581 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Omid Mohamadi, Mohammad Rahimi‐Madiseh, Morteza Sedehi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicStuttering Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStutteringAudiologyVoice DisorderPsychologyMedicineIntervention (counseling)Psychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 24pt 36pt;"><span style="color: #131413; font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: medium;">The inability to communicate easily and clearly can have far-reaching debilitating effects, not only in childhood, but throughout a lifetime. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of stuttering, voice disorder, and speech sound disorders in Persian preschoolers in Shahrekord, Iran. Information about 1,387 children ages 5 to 6 was obtained via face-to-face screening and assessment. The total prevalence of speech disorders was 17.1%. The prevalence of stuttering was 1.5%, while 13.4% had a speech sound disorder, and 2.2% had voice disorder. The prevalence of stuttering was higher in males (2.2%) than females (0.7%); of speech sound disorders was higher in males (17.4%) than females (9.1%); and of voice disorder was higher in males (2.6%) than females (1.6%). The prevalence of stuttering and speech sound disorder was significantly different according to gender and positive family history. The prevalence figures revealed that a considerable number of preschoolers with speech disorders were missed in parents’ and teachers’ reports. Those children required more intensive communication support than they were receiving. Therefore, classroom teachers should work with speech and language pathologists to identify and assess preschoolers with communication disorders, and to develop intervention strategies.</span></p>

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicStuttering Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207