Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 20, 2026
12:43
A Protocol for Comprehensive Assessment of Bulbar Dysfunction in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ALS
Published on: February 21, 2011
35.0K
Exploring Methodological Decisions for Calculating the Minimally Detectable Change in Dysarthria: Reliability,
Kelly E Gates1, Antje S Mefferd2, Kaila L Stipancic1
1Department of Communicative Disorders and Sciences, University at Buffalo, NY.
Summary
Methodological choices significantly impact minimally detectable change (MDC) calculations for speech intelligibility in dysarthria. Detailed reporting of MDC methodology is crucial for future research and interpreting intelligibility changes.
Area of Science:
- Rehabilitation Sciences
- Speech-Language Pathology
- Neurology
Background:
- Minimally detectable change (MDC) is essential for interpreting outcome measure changes in rehabilitation.
- MDC calculation relies on reliability methods, statistics, and standard error of measurement (SEM).
- Variations in these calculation components can influence MDC thresholds, particularly for speech intelligibility.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the impact of different methodological choices on MDC thresholds for speech intelligibility in individuals with dysarthria.
- To compare MDCs derived from various reliability methods, reliability statistics, and SEM calculations.
Main Methods:
- Utilized speech intelligibility test recordings from 200 speakers (including various neurological conditions and healthy controls).
- Calculated MDCs using three reliability methods (test-retest, split-half, intrarater), two reliability statistics (Pearson r, ICCs), and three SEM formulas.
- Employed Kruskal-Wallis tests to analyze the effects of these methodological variations.
Main Results:
- Significant differences in MDCs were observed when comparing split-half versus test-retest reliability.
- Differences in MDCs were also found between Pearson r and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs).
- Two out of three SEM calculation methods yielded significant differences in MDC values.
Conclusions:
- Methodological decisions in calculating MDCs demonstrably affect speech intelligibility measures in dysarthria.
- Emphasizes the critical need for precise and detailed reporting of MDC calculation methodologies in future studies.
- Provides guidance for researchers and clinicians in selecting appropriate methods and contextualizing existing intelligibility data.
More Related Videos
14:05Behavioral Assessment of Hearing in 2 to 4 Year-old Children: A Two-interval, Observer-based Procedure Using Conditioned Play-based Responses
Published on: January 23, 2017
29.2K
04:04Transauricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation and Electroencephalographic Assessment in Disorders of Consciousness
Published on: July 11, 2025
301
Related Concept Videos
01:37Statistical Significance
Once data is collected from both the experimental and the control groups, a statistical analysis is conducted to find out if there are meaningful differences between the two groups. A statistical analysis determines how likely any difference found is due to chance (and thus not meaningful). In psychology, group differences are considered meaningful, or significant, if the odds that these differences occurred by chance alone are 5 percent or less. Stated another way, if we repeated this...
01:09Empirical Method to Interpret Standard Deviation
The empirical rule, also known as the three-sigma rule, allows a statistician to interpret the standard deviation in a normally distributed dataset. The rule states that 68% of the data lies within one standard deviation from the mean, 95% lies within two standard deviations from the mean, and 99.7% lies within three standard deviations from the mean. Additionally, this rule is also called the 68-95-99.7 rule.
This rule is used widely in statistics to calculate the proportion of data values...
This rule is used widely in statistics to calculate the proportion of data values...
01:19Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation
A complete procedure to test a claim about population standard deviation or population variance is explained here.
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...
01:11Statistical Analysis: Overview
When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
01:15Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
01:13Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...