MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093186205 · doi:10.1080/17549507.2020.1808701

Oral‐diadochokinetic rates among healthy Malaysian-Mandarin speakers: A cross linguistic comparison

2020· article· en· W3093186205 on OpenAlexaff
Shin Ying Chu, Jaehoon Lee, Steven M. Barlow, Boaz M. Ben‐David, Kai Xing Lim, Jia Hao Foong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersMinistry of Higher Education, Malaysia
KeywordsMandarin ChineseRepetition (rhetorical device)PsychologyHebrewLinguisticsWord (group theory)Multivariate analysis of varianceSyllableAudiologyMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study examined the effects of non‐word versus real word, age, and gender on oral‐DDK rates among healthy Malaysian-Mandarin speakers. Comparison between non-word of Malaysian-Mandarin and Hebrew speakers was examined.Method One-hundred and seventeen speakers (18–83 years old, 46% men) were audio‐recorded while performing non-word (repetition of “pataka”) and real-word oral‐DDK tasks (“butter cake” and “怕他看 ([pha4tha1khan4])”). The number of syllables produced in 8 seconds was counted from the audio recording to derive the oral-DDK rates. A MANOVA was conducted to compare the rates between age groups (young = 18–40 years, n = 56; middle = 41–60 years, n = 39; older = 61–83 years, n = 22) and gender. In a second analysis, “pataka” results were compared between this study and previous findings with Hebrew speakersResult No gender effects were found. However, rates significantly decreased with age (p < 0.001). Repetition of real words was faster than that of non-words – English words (5.55 ± 1.19 syllables/s) > non‐words (5.29 ± 1.23) > Mandarin words (4.91 ± 1.13). Malaysian-Mandarin speakers performed slower than Hebrew speakers on “pataka” task.Conclusion Aging has a large impact on oromotor functions, indicating that speech-language pathologists should consider using age-adjusted norms.

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)0.002
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Speech-Language PathologySame topicVoice and Speech DisordersFrench-language works237,207