SLPSystematic ReviewJournal of deaf studies and deaf education2024

Measuring speech intelligibility with deaf and hard-of-hearing children: A systematic review.

Harpa Stefánsdóttir, Kathryn Crowe, Egill Magnússon and 4 others

PMID 38079579

WHAT IT FOUND

No agreed-upon measure exists for assessing how well deaf children are understood.

Only 24% of the 204 studies reviewed explained why they chose their test. Combining a rating scale with a word-accuracy score may give the most complete picture.

Key findings

01Of the 204 studies reviewed, the most common subjective measure was the Speech Intelligibility Rating scale (SIR) used in 69 studies, and the most common objective measures were PCC (32 studies) and BIT (20 studies).

02Only 49 of the 204 studies (24.0%) provided any rationale for their choice of speech intelligibility measure.

03The review found no agreed-upon gold standard for measuring speech intelligibility in children who are DHH, and suggested that combining a subjective and an objective measure may provide a stronger assessment than either alone.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

56.9% of included studies did not provide precise age information for participants at the time of testing, making it hard to know exactly which age group each result applies to. 65.7% of studies did not explicitly report pure-tone averages, so the severity of hearing loss varied widely and is hard to account for when comparing results. No studies in the review measured suprasegmental features of speech (intonation, stress, rhythm), which the authors note can greatly impact intelligibility. Studies where more than half the participants were 13 or older were excluded, so measures validated only in adolescents or adults were not captured. Many studies used custom or unnamed rating scales without providing the actual scale in the article, making it impossible to verify what was being measured.

The easy way to misread this

Do not treat the Speech Intelligibility Rating scale as the validated standard for deaf children simply because it appears in the most studies. The review found it is the most used, but its psychometric properties in languages other than English are limited, and no single measure has been established as the gold standard for this population.

Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →