NB: THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN CLOSED. THE QUESTIONNAIRE IS STILL AVAILABLE IN ORDER TO ALLOW AN OVERVIEW FOR THE READER OF THE ARTICLE RESULTING FROM THIS STUDY. NO FURTHER RESPONSES AFTER DECEMBER 22, 2020 WILL BE ANALYZED.
Investigators: Timothy POMMÉE1, Julien PINQUIER1, Virginie WOISARD2,3,4, Julie MAUCLAIR1, Renée SPEYER5
1 IRIT, CNRS, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France
2 CHU Larrey, Toulouse, France
3 Oncopole, Toulouse, France
4 Laboratoire Octogone Lordat, Toulouse, France
5 Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Many thanks for participating in the third and final round of this consensus survey. We are very grateful to you for sticking with us in spite of the additional workload that affects us all in these peculiar times.
This final round will be even shorter than the previous one! It should not last longer than 10 minutes.
The survey for this round addresses some details regarding the terminology and measurement of intelligibility and comprehensibility, and includes 4 questions (all binary!).
As a quick reminder:
When assessing speech, both instrumental and perceptual measures can be used, the latter of which still seem to be the golden standard in clinical practice. Nonetheless, there appears to be a lack of consensus regarding the terminology of the perceptual concepts, as well as how to assess them.
The previous rounds have allowed us to draft a paragraph to define these two concepts. However, four points still remain ambiguous, which is why we wanted to ask for your opinion one last time.
For each statement, you will be given a summarized feedback of the group’s responses in round 2 (n=34). You will then be asked to state your agreement with the modified assertions, by simply checking “agree” or “disagree”. You will be able to comment and specify the reasons of your disagreement if you wish to do so.
Please take time to answer each of the questions and provide as much information as possible.