Investigation of the effect of delayed auditory feedback and transcranial direct current stimulation (DAF-tDCS) treatment for the enhancement of speech fluency in adults who stutter: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: With a population prevalence of one percent, stuttering is among the main speech pathology-related topics of research. Adults who stutter may benefit from transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as an adjunctive intervention for enhancing speech fluency. In this study, Delayed Auditory Feedback (DAF) was combined with tDCS applied over the superior temporal gyrus. It was anticipated that the combined intervention cause improvements in speech fluency.Methods: A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of intervention in enhancing speech fluency. Fifty participants were randomly allocated to the intervention or control group. In the intervention group, participants received DAF combined with anodal tDCS, while the control group was exposed to sham tDCS simultaneously with DAF. Each subject participated in six intervention sessions. Speech fluency was assessed as the baseline, before intervention as well as immediately, one week and six weeks after intervention. Results: In the intervention group, the percentage of stuttered syllables was significantly reduced immediately, one week and six weeks after the intervention, as compared with the control group. The scores of the Stuttering Severity Instrument, also showed a significant reduction in the intervention group compared with the control group. No significant difference was found in the Overall Assessment of the Speaker’s Experience of Stuttering questionnaire scores between the two groups after intervention. Conclusion: The results of this study propose anodal tDCS as an adjunctive method to increase speech fluency in stuttering for a prolonged time course after intervention, when combined with fluency therapy.Trial registration: This trial was registered in ClinicalTrial.gov before recruiting the subjects. The registration number is NCT03990168 and the date of registration is June 18, 2019. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03990168
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".