Correcting Residual Errors With Spectral, Ultrasound, Traditional Speech Therapy

NCT03737318 | Completed Results DMC

• 2 other identifiers: C-RESULTS-RCTR01DC017476
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 108
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 2

Brief Summary

Children with speech sound disorder show diminished accuracy and intelligibility in spoken communication and may thus be perceived as less capable or intelligent than peers, with negative consequences for both socioemotional and socioeconomic outcomes. While most speech errors resolve by the late school-age years, between 2-5% of speakers exhibit residual speech errors (RSE) that persist through adolescence or even adulthood, reflecting about 6 million cases in the US. Both affected children/families and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) have highlighted the critical need for research to identify more effective forms of treatment for children with RSE. In a series of single-case experimental studies, research has found that treatment incorporating technologically enhanced sensory feedback (visual-acoustic biofeedback, ultrasound biofeedback) can improve speech in individuals with RSE who have not responded to previous intervention. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing traditional vs biofeedback-enhanced intervention is the essential next step to inform evidence-based decision-making for this prevalent population. Larger-scale research is also needed to understand heterogeneity across individuals in the magnitude of response to biofeedback treatment. The overall objective of this proposal is to conduct clinical research that will guide the evidence-based management of RSE while also providing novel insights into the sensorimotor underpinnings of speech. The central hypothesis is that biofeedback will yield greater gains in speech accuracy than traditional treatment, and that individual deficit profiles will predict relative response to visual-acoustic vs ultrasound biofeedback. This study will enroll n = 118 children who misarticulate the /r/ sound, the most common type of RSE. This first component of the study will evaluate the efficacy of biofeedback relative to traditional treatment in a well-powered randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound and visual-acoustic biofeedback, which have similar evidence bases, will be represented equally.

Conditions

Speech Sound Disorder

Keywords

speech, articulation, motor development

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Change in F3-F2 Distance (Hz) Across Sessions, Measured From /r/ Sounds Produced in Syllables or Words During Practice.

  F3-F2 distance is a number (in Hz) that reflects how close a child's /r/ sound is to a typical adult-like /r/. Smaller numbers indicate more accurate /r/ production; larger numbers indicate a distorted /r/. In typical peers, accurate /r/ is roughly \~500 Hz, whereas distorted /r/ values are often \>1000 Hz. During Phase I (3 sessions over \~1 week), children produced /r/ in syllables/words. For this Outcome, we report change across sessions: a single model-based estimate of how much F3-F2 decreased from Session 1 to Session 3 (i.e., the rate of improvement). A more negative change indicates greater improvement.

  Phase I: three 90-min treatment sessions delivered over ~1 week; reported value is the change from Session 1 to Session 3 (slope across sessions)

Secondary Outcomes (2)

• Change From Pre to Post in Percent "Correct" Ratings by Untrained Listeners, for /r/ Sounds Produced in Word Probes.

  Pre (before initiation of treatment) and Post (after the end of all treatment; ~10 weeks later).

• Impact of Speech Disorder on Social, Emotional, and Academic Well-being (Parent Survey)

  Pre (before initiation of treatment) and Post (after completion of all treatment; ~10 weeks later)

Study Arms (3)

Group 1

EXPERIMENTAL

Traditional articulation treatment

Behavioral: Traditional articulation treatment

Group 2

EXPERIMENTAL

Biofeedback--visual-acoustic

Behavioral: Biofeedback--visual-acoustic; Behavioral: Traditional articulation treatment

Group 3

EXPERIMENTAL

Biofeedback-ultrasound

Behavioral: Biofeedback-ultrasound; Behavioral: Traditional articulation treatment

Interventions

Biofeedback--visual-acoustic BEHAVIORAL

In visual-acoustic biofeedback treatment, the elements of traditional treatment (auditory models and verbal descriptions of articulator placement) are enhanced with a dynamic display of the speech signal in the form of the 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 will be cued to make their real-time LPC spectrum match a visual target characterized by a low F3 frequency. They will be encouraged to attend to the visual display while adjusting the placement of their articulators and observing how those adjustments impact F3.

Group 2

Traditional articulation treatment BEHAVIORAL

Traditional 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 will be used as visual aids; however, no real-time visual display of articulatory or acoustic information will be made available.

Group 1; Group 2; Group 3

Biofeedback-ultrasound BEHAVIORAL

In ultrasound biofeedback, the elements of traditional treatment (auditory models and verbal descriptions of articulator placement) are enhanced with a real-time ultrasound display of the shape and movements of the tongue. One or two target tongue shapes will be selected for each participant, and a trace of the selected target will be superimposed over the ultrasound screen. Participants will be cued to reshape the tongue to match this target during /r/ production.

Group 3

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 9 Years - 15 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Child (0-17)

You may qualify if:

• 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 pure-tone hearing screening at 20 decibels Hearing Level (HL).
• 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.

You may not qualify if:

• 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 standard score below 80 on the Core Language Index of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5 (CELF-5).
• Must not exhibit voice or fluency disorder of a severity judged likely to interfere with the ability to participate in study activities.
• Must not have an existing diagnosis of developmental disability or 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.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Montclair State University: collaborator
• National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD): collaborator
• New York University: lead
• Syracuse University: collaborator

Study Sites (2)

Montclair State University

Bloomfield, New Jersey, 07003, United States

Location

Syracuse University

Syracuse, New York, 13244, United States

Location

Related Publications (19)

• Preston JL, McCabe P, Tiede M, Whalen DH. Tongue shapes for rhotics in school-age children with and without residual speech errors. Clin Linguist Phon. 2019;33(4):334-348. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2018.1517190. Epub 2018 Sep 10.

  PMID: 30199271 BACKGROUND

• Preston JL, McAllister T, Phillips E, Boyce S, Tiede M, Kim JS, Whalen DH. Treatment for Residual Rhotic Errors With High- and Low-Frequency Ultrasound Visual Feedback: A Single-Case Experimental Design. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018 Aug 8;61(8):1875-1892. doi: 10.1044/2018_JSLHR-S-17-0441.

  PMID: 30073249 BACKGROUND

• 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.

  PMID: 29792525 BACKGROUND

• Preston JL, Holliman-Lopez G, Leece MC. Do Participants Report Any Undesired Effects in Ultrasound Speech Therapy? Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018 May 3;27(2):813-818. doi: 10.1044/2017_AJSLP-17-0121.

  PMID: 29546269 BACKGROUND

• Preston JL, McAllister Byun T, Boyce SE, Hamilton S, Tiede M, Phillips E, Rivera-Campos A, Whalen DH. Ultrasound Images of the Tongue: A Tutorial for Assessment and Remediation of Speech Sound Errors. J Vis Exp. 2017 Jan 3;(119):55123. doi: 10.3791/55123.

  PMID: 28117824 BACKGROUND

• Preston JL, Leece MC, Maas E. Motor-based treatment with and without ultrasound feedback for residual speech-sound errors. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2017 Jan;52(1):80-94. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12259. Epub 2016 Jun 14.

  PMID: 27296780 BACKGROUND

• Campbell 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.

  PMID: 28795872 BACKGROUND

• Campbell 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.

  PMID: 28703653 BACKGROUND

• McAllister 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.

  PMID: 28389677 BACKGROUND

• McAllister 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.

  PMID: 28207800 BACKGROUND

• McAllister 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.

  PMID: 27891084 BACKGROUND

• McAllister 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.

  PMID: 25578293 BACKGROUND

• Hitchcock ER, Byun TM, Swartz M, Lazarus R. Efficacy of Electropalatography for Treating Misarticulation of /r/. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017 Nov 8;26(4):1141-1158. doi: 10.1044/2017_AJSLP-16-0122.

  PMID: 28834534 BACKGROUND

• Harel 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.

  PMID: 27267258 BACKGROUND

• Hitchcock 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.

  PMID: 26458203 BACKGROUND

• Hitchcock ER, Byun TM. Enhancing generalisation in biofeedback intervention using the challenge point framework: a case study. Clin Linguist Phon. 2015 Jan;29(1):59-75. doi: 10.3109/02699206.2014.956232. Epub 2014 Sep 12.

  PMID: 25216375 BACKGROUND

• Byun TM, Hitchcock ER, Swartz MT. Retroflex versus bunched in treatment for rhotic misarticulation: evidence from ultrasound biofeedback intervention. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2014 Dec;57(6):2116-30. doi: 10.1044/2014_JSLHR-S-14-0034.

  PMID: 25088034 BACKGROUND

• Byun 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.

  PMID: 22442281 BACKGROUND

• McAllister T, Preston JL, Hitchcock ER, Hill J. Protocol for Correcting Residual Errors with Spectral, ULtrasound, Traditional Speech therapy Randomized Controlled Trial (C-RESULTS RCT). BMC Pediatr. 2020 Feb 11;20(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12887-020-1941-5.

  PMID: 32046671 DERIVED

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Speech Sound Disorder; Speech

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Communication Disorders; Neurodevelopmental Disorders; Mental Disorders; Verbal Behavior; Communication; Behavior

Results Point of Contact

• Title: Tara McAllister, Associate Professor
• Organization: New York University

tkm214@nyu.edu

212-992-9445

Publication Agreements

• PI is Sponsor Employee: Yes
• Restrictive Agreement: No

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Masking Details: All perceptual ratings will be obtained from blinded, naive listeners recruited through online crowdsourcing. Following protocols refined in previous published research, binary rating responses will be aggregated over at least 9 unique listeners per token.
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Model Details: All participants will complete a Dynamic Assessment session (Phase 0) consisting of 2 hours of traditional (non-biofeedback) instruction. Participants will be categorized into high, moderate, and low response groups based on performance in Phase 0, and the response groups will be block randomized to traditional or biofeedback speech treatment. Within the biofeedback condition, individuals will be sub-randomized in equal numbers to receive visual-acoustic or ultrasound treatment. Participants will then complete two phases of speech treatment in their randomly assigned condition. Phase 1 (Acquisition) will consist of high-intensity, highly interactive practice delivered in three 90-minute sessions over one week. Phase 2 (Generalization) will elicit structured practice of /r/ in 16 semiweekly 45-minute sessions over 8 weeks.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: October 31, 2018
• First Posted: November 9, 2018
• Study Start: March 1, 2019
• Primary Completion: August 31, 2024
• Study Completion: August 31, 2024
• Last Updated: January 5, 2026
• Results First Posted: January 5, 2026

Record last verified: 2025-03

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

US (2)