Effect of perceptive-auditory training on the classification of speech hypernasality.

Only three inexperienced speech-language pathologists were tested, so the results cannot show what would happen in a larger training group. The study used only a before-and-after comparison in the same three evaluators, not a separate comparison group, so changes could reflect practice or familiarity rather than the training itself. Other speech symptoms, such as nasal air emission and compensatory articulation, were not controlled, so ratings may reflect those features rather than hypernasality alone. The samples were restricted to normal voice, so the study does not address hypernasality in people with dysphonia. Individual results were inconsistent: EV3 improved, while EV2 decreased in agreement with the gold standard. The training included calibration, reference samples, feedback, and retraining, so the study cannot show which component mattered. The apparent increase in agreement between evaluators after training was not statistically significant.

Financial support came from CAPES. The supplied text does not report other conflicts of interest.

Do not conclude that this training makes inexperienced speech-language pathologists better at grading hypernasality. The overall correct-answer percentage did not improve significantly, and individual agreement results were inconsistent.