Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering
Identifieur interne : 001928 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001927; suivant : 001929Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering
Auteurs : Susan Block ; Mark Onslow ; Ann Packman ; Georgia DacakisSource :
- International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders [ 1368-2822 ] ; 2006-07-08.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
Background: Clinical trials have shown that behavioural treatments based on variants of prolonged‐speech (PS) are best practice for reducing the stuttering rate in adults. However, while stuttering is significantly reduced or eliminated for most adults in the short‐term with such treatment, relapse in the longer‐term is common. Consequently, there has been interest in attempting to establish variables that predict responsiveness to PS‐based treatments. Identifying such variables would enable risk prediction and also contribute to the tailoring of treatments to suit individuals who are less likely to benefit in the long‐term from the conventional PS‐based treatments. Variables that have been investigated to date are the stuttering severity, the attitude to communication and the locus of control. Aims: The present study revisited this issue with methodological improvements. Methods & Procedures: Prospective, continuous measures of outcome several years after treatment, and well‐powered, least‐squares multivariate regression, with backwards elimination, were used to determine the best model to predict short‐ and long‐term outcomes of a PS‐based treatment. Other predictor variables were also included. The stuttering rates of 78 participants were measured immediately after the intensive stage of treatment, and during a surprize telephone call 3.5–5 years after treatment. Outcomes & Results: Attitude to communication and locus of control were separate constructs to stuttering rate. While the stuttering rate predicted outcome, neither of the two non‐behavioural variables predicted outcome in either the short‐ or the long‐term. Conclusions: The most significant finding is that the non‐behavioural variables of attitude to communication and locus of control did not predict treatment outcomes. This is contrary to the findings of most previous studies.
Url:
DOI: 10.1080/13682820600623853
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering</title><author><name sortKey="Block, Susan" sort="Block, Susan" uniqKey="Block S" first="Susan" last="Block">Susan Block</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: s.block@latrobe.edu.au</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Onslow, Mark" sort="Onslow, Mark" uniqKey="Onslow M" first="Mark" last="Onslow">Mark Onslow</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Australian Stuttering Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Packman, Ann" sort="Packman, Ann" uniqKey="Packman A" first="Ann" last="Packman">Ann Packman</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Dacakis, Georgia" sort="Dacakis, Georgia" uniqKey="Dacakis G" first="Georgia" last="Dacakis">Georgia Dacakis</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12</idno><date when="2006" year="2006">2006</date><idno type="doi">10.1080/13682820600623853</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001928</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001928</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering</title><author><name sortKey="Block, Susan" sort="Block, Susan" uniqKey="Block S" first="Susan" last="Block">Susan Block</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: s.block@latrobe.edu.au</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Onslow, Mark" sort="Onslow, Mark" uniqKey="Onslow M" first="Mark" last="Onslow">Mark Onslow</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Australian Stuttering Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Packman, Ann" sort="Packman, Ann" uniqKey="Packman A" first="Ann" last="Packman">Ann Packman</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Dacakis, Georgia" sort="Dacakis, Georgia" uniqKey="Dacakis G" first="Georgia" last="Dacakis">Georgia Dacakis</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders</title><idno type="ISSN">1368-2822</idno><idno type="eISSN">1460-6984</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2006-07-08">2006-07-08</date><biblScope unit="volume">41</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="395">395</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="406">406</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1368-2822</idno></series><idno type="istex">DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1080/13682820600623853</idno><idno type="ArticleID">JLCD652</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1368-2822</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>management</term><term>measurement</term><term>outcomes</term><term>predictors</term><term>stuttering</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Background: Clinical trials have shown that behavioural treatments based on variants of prolonged‐speech (PS) are best practice for reducing the stuttering rate in adults. However, while stuttering is significantly reduced or eliminated for most adults in the short‐term with such treatment, relapse in the longer‐term is common. Consequently, there has been interest in attempting to establish variables that predict responsiveness to PS‐based treatments. Identifying such variables would enable risk prediction and also contribute to the tailoring of treatments to suit individuals who are less likely to benefit in the long‐term from the conventional PS‐based treatments. Variables that have been investigated to date are the stuttering severity, the attitude to communication and the locus of control. Aims: The present study revisited this issue with methodological improvements. Methods & Procedures: Prospective, continuous measures of outcome several years after treatment, and well‐powered, least‐squares multivariate regression, with backwards elimination, were used to determine the best model to predict short‐ and long‐term outcomes of a PS‐based treatment. Other predictor variables were also included. The stuttering rates of 78 participants were measured immediately after the intensive stage of treatment, and during a surprize telephone call 3.5–5 years after treatment. Outcomes & Results: Attitude to communication and locus of control were separate constructs to stuttering rate. While the stuttering rate predicted outcome, neither of the two non‐behavioural variables predicted outcome in either the short‐ or the long‐term. Conclusions: The most significant finding is that the non‐behavioural variables of attitude to communication and locus of control did not predict treatment outcomes. This is contrary to the findings of most previous studies.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Susan Block</name><affiliations><json:string>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</json:string><json:string>E-mail: s.block@latrobe.edu.au</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Mark Onslow</name><affiliations><json:string>Australian Stuttering Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Ann Packman</name><affiliations><json:string>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Georgia Dacakis</name><affiliations><json:string>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>stuttering</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>management</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>measurement</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>outcomes</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>predictors</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>JLCD652</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Background: Clinical trials have shown that behavioural treatments based on variants of prolonged‐speech (PS) are best practice for reducing the stuttering rate in adults. However, while stuttering is significantly reduced or eliminated for most adults in the short‐term with such treatment, relapse in the longer‐term is common. Consequently, there has been interest in attempting to establish variables that predict responsiveness to PS‐based treatments. Identifying such variables would enable risk prediction and also contribute to the tailoring of treatments to suit individuals who are less likely to benefit in the long‐term from the conventional PS‐based treatments. Variables that have been investigated to date are the stuttering severity, the attitude to communication and the locus of control. Aims: The present study revisited this issue with methodological improvements. Methods & Procedures: Prospective, continuous measures of outcome several years after treatment, and well‐powered, least‐squares multivariate regression, with backwards elimination, were used to determine the best model to predict short‐ and long‐term outcomes of a PS‐based treatment. Other predictor variables were also included. The stuttering rates of 78 participants were measured immediately after the intensive stage of treatment, and during a surprize telephone call 3.5–5 years after treatment. Outcomes & Results: Attitude to communication and locus of control were separate constructs to stuttering rate. While the stuttering rate predicted outcome, neither of the two non‐behavioural variables predicted outcome in either the short‐ or the long‐term. Conclusions: The most significant finding is that the non‐behavioural variables of attitude to communication and locus of control did not predict treatment outcomes. This is contrary to the findings of most previous studies.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>7.938</score><pdfVersion>1.2</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>493.228 x 702.992 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>1872</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>4938</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>31625</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>12</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>263</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering</title><refBibs><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Craig</name></json:item></author><host><volume>153</volume><pages><last>240</last><first>236</first></pages><author></author><title>British Journal of Psychiatry</title></host><title>Prediction of outcome following treatment for stuttering</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. Cutler</name></json:item></author><host><volume>39</volume><pages><last>319</last><first>312</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Stuttering therapy: the relation between changes in symptom level and attitudes</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Craig</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Feyer</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. Hoddinott</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. Howie</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Neilson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>48</volume><pages><last>246</last><first>226</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Stuttering: a review of research findings circa 1982</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. M. Feyer</name></json:item></author><host><volume>9</volume><pages><last>457</last><first>443</first></pages><author></author><title>Behavior Modification</title></host><title>Does behavior therapy still work when the experimenters depart? An analysis of a behavioral treatment programme for stuttering</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. Guitar</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. Howie</name></json:item></author><host><volume>45</volume><pages><last>307</last><first>287</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Meta‐analysis of the effects of stuttering treatment</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Neilson</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Cassar</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>232</last><first>213</first></pages><author></author><title>Progress in the Treatment of Fluency Disorders</title></host><title>Informing stutterers about treatment</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Block S., Dacakis G.. La Trobe Fluency Clinic. Student Manual. La Trobe University, Melbourne 2003.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. Block</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Onslow</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Packman</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. Gray</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Dacakis</name></json:item></author><host><volume>40</volume><pages><last>466</last><first>455</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders</title></host><title>Treatment of chronic stuttering: outcomes from a student training model</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E. Boberg</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>111</last><first>71</first></pages><author></author><title>Maintenance of Fluency</title></host><title>Maintenance of fluency: an experimental program</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E. Boberg</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. Kully</name></json:item></author><host><volume>37</volume><pages><last>1059</last><first>1050</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Research</title></host><title>Long‐term results of an intensive treatment program for adults and adolescents who stutter</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Buchner A., Faul F., Erdfelder E.. University of Trier, Trier 1997, G•Power: A Priori, Post‐hoc, and Compromise Power Analyses for the Macintosh (V.2.1.2) [Program].</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Craig</name></json:item></author><host><volume>23</volume><pages><last>30</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Fluency Disorders</title></host><title>Relapse following treatment for stuttering: a critical review and correlative data</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Craig A.. Treating Stuttering in Older Children, Adolescents and Adults. Feedback, Gosford, NSW 1998b.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Craig</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item></author><host><volume>9</volume><pages><last>442</last><first>427</first></pages><author></author><title>Behavior Modification</title></host><title>The prediction and prevention of relapse following stuttering: the value of self‐control techniques and locus of control measures</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Craig</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. Franklin</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item></author><host><volume>57</volume><pages><last>180</last><first>173</first></pages><author></author><title>British Journal of Medical Psychology</title></host><title>A scale to measure locus of control of behavior</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Craig</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. Hancock</name></json:item></author><host><volume>23</volume><pages><last>60</last><first>48</first></pages><author></author><title>Australian Journal of Human Communication Disorders</title></host><title>Self‐reported factors related to relapse following treatment for stuttering</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Craig</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. Howie</name></json:item></author><host><volume>21</volume><pages><last>66</last><first>65</first></pages><author></author><title>British Journal of Clinical Psychology</title></host><title>Locus of control and maintenance of behavioural therapy skills</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L. De Nil</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. Kroll</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>364</last><first>345</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Fluency Disorders</title></host><title>The relation between locus of control and long‐term stuttering treatment outcome in adult stutterers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. L. Erickson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>724</last><first>711</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Research</title></host><title>Assessing communication attitudes among stutterers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P. Finn</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Gow</name></json:item></author><host><volume>154</volume><pages><last>274</last><first>273</first></pages><author></author><title>British Journal of Psychiatry</title></host><title>Predictors of outcome after treatment for stuttering</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>I. Goldiamond</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>156</last><first>105</first></pages><author></author><title>Research in Behaviour Modification</title></host><title>Stuttering and fluency as manipulable operant response classes</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. Guitar</name></json:item></author><host><volume>19</volume><pages><last>600</last><first>590</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Research</title></host><title>Pretreatment factors associated with the outcome of stuttering therapy</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. Guitar</name></json:item></author><host><volume>44</volume><pages><last>403</last><first>400</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>A response to Ingham's critique</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. Guitar</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. Bass</name></json:item></author><host><volume>43</volume><pages><last>400</last><first>392</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Stuttering therapy: the relation between attitude change and long‐term outcome</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Hancock</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Craig</name></json:item></author><host><volume>23</volume><pages><last>48</last><first>31</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Fluency Disorders</title></host><title>Predictors of stuttering relapse one year following treatment for children aged 9 to 14 years</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E. Harrison</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Onslow</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. Andrews</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Packman</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Webber</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>212</last><first>191</first></pages><author></author><title>Treatment Efficacy for Stuttering. A Search for Empirical Bases</title></host><title>Control of stuttering with prolonged speech: preliminary outcome of a one‐day instatement program</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. Helps</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. Dalton</name></json:item></author><host><volume>14</volume><pages><last>30</last><first>17</first></pages><author></author><title>British Journal of Disorders of Communication</title></host><title>The effectiveness of an intensive group speech therapy program for adult stammerers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P. Howie</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. Tanner</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Andrews</name></json:item></author><host><volume>46</volume><pages><last>109</last><first>104</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Short‐ and long‐term outcome in an intensive treatment program for adult stutterers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. J. Ingham</name></json:item></author><host><volume>44</volume><pages><last>400</last><first>397</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Comments on ‘Stuttering therapy: the relation between attitude change and long‐term outcome’</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Ingham R. J.. Stuttering and Behavior Therapy. Current Status and Experimental Foundations. College‐Hill, San Diego, CA 1984.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. B. Kannel</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. McGee</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. Gordon</name></json:item></author><host><volume>38</volume><pages><last>51</last><first>46</first></pages><author></author><title>American Journal of Cardiology</title></host><title>A general cardiovascular risk profile: the Framingham study</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. Martin</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. Haroldson</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. Triden</name></json:item></author><host><volume>49</volume><pages><last>58</last><first>53</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Stuttering and speech naturalness</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. O'Brian</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Onslow</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Cream</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Packman</name></json:item></author><host><volume>46</volume><pages><last>946</last><first>933</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research</title></host><title>The Camperdown program: outcomes of a new prolonged‐speech treatment model</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Onslow</name></json:item><json:item><name>L. Costa</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. Andrews</name></json:item><json:item><name>E. Harrison</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Packman</name></json:item></author><host><volume>39</volume><pages><last>749</last><first>734</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Research</title></host><title>Speech outcomes of a prolonged‐speech treatment for stuttering</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Onslow</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. J. Ingham</name></json:item></author><host><volume>52</volume><pages><last>17</last><first>2</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Speech quality measurement and the management of stuttering</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Onslow</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. O'Brian</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Packman</name></json:item><json:item><name>I. Rousseau</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Evidence‐based Treatment of Stuttering: Empirical Issues and Clinical Implications</title></host><title>Long‐term follow up of speech outcomes for a prolonged‐speech treatment for stuttering: the effects of paradox on stuttering treatment research</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. B. Rotter</name></json:item></author><host><volume>80</volume><pages><last>28</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Monographs: General and Applied</title></host><title>Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control or reinforcement</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. M. Stonehouse</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. J. Forrester</name></json:item></author><host><volume>25</volume><pages><last>74</last><first>63</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Statistics</title></host><title>Robustness of the t and U tests under combined assumption violations</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L. Ulliana</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. J. Ingham</name></json:item></author><host><volume>46</volume><pages><last>93</last><first>83</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>Behavioral and nonbehavioral variables in the measurement of stutterers' communication attitudes</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. A. Young</name></json:item></author><host><volume>46</volume><pages><last>222</last><first>221</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders</title></host><title>A reanalysis of ‘Stuttering therapy: the relationship between attitude change and long‐term outcome’</title></json:item></refBibs><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><volume>41</volume><publisherId><json:string>JLCD</json:string></publisherId><pages><total>12</total><last>406</last><first>395</first></pages><issn><json:string>1368-2822</json:string></issn><issue>4</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1460-6984</json:string></eissn><title>International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1460-6984</json:string></doi></host><categories><wos><json:string>social science</json:string><json:string>rehabilitation</json:string><json:string>linguistics</json:string><json:string>science</json:string><json:string>audiology & speech-language pathology</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>2006</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2006</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1080/13682820600623853</json:string></doi><id>DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12</id><score>0.10568633</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><availability><p>2006 Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists</p></availability><date>2006</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Susan</forename><surname>Block</surname></persName><email>s.block@latrobe.edu.au</email><affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Mark</forename><surname>Onslow</surname></persName><affiliation>Australian Stuttering Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-3"><persName><forename type="first">Ann</forename><surname>Packman</surname></persName><affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-4"><persName><forename type="first">Georgia</forename><surname>Dacakis</surname></persName><affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders</title><idno type="pISSN">1368-2822</idno><idno type="eISSN">1460-6984</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1460-6984</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2006-07-08"></date><biblScope unit="volume">41</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="395">395</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="406">406</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1080/13682820600623853</idno><idno type="ArticleID">JLCD652</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2006</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Background: Clinical trials have shown that behavioural treatments based on variants of prolonged‐speech (PS) are best practice for reducing the stuttering rate in adults. However, while stuttering is significantly reduced or eliminated for most adults in the short‐term with such treatment, relapse in the longer‐term is common. Consequently, there has been interest in attempting to establish variables that predict responsiveness to PS‐based treatments. Identifying such variables would enable risk prediction and also contribute to the tailoring of treatments to suit individuals who are less likely to benefit in the long‐term from the conventional PS‐based treatments. Variables that have been investigated to date are the stuttering severity, the attitude to communication and the locus of control. Aims: The present study revisited this issue with methodological improvements. Methods & Procedures: Prospective, continuous measures of outcome several years after treatment, and well‐powered, least‐squares multivariate regression, with backwards elimination, were used to determine the best model to predict short‐ and long‐term outcomes of a PS‐based treatment. Other predictor variables were also included. The stuttering rates of 78 participants were measured immediately after the intensive stage of treatment, and during a surprize telephone call 3.5–5 years after treatment. Outcomes & Results: Attitude to communication and locus of control were separate constructs to stuttering rate. While the stuttering rate predicted outcome, neither of the two non‐behavioural variables predicted outcome in either the short‐ or the long‐term. Conclusions: The most significant finding is that the non‐behavioural variables of attitude to communication and locus of control did not predict treatment outcomes. This is contrary to the findings of most previous studies.</p></abstract><textClass xml:lang="en"><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>keywords</head><item><term>stuttering</term></item><item><term>management</term></item><item><term>measurement</term></item><item><term>outcomes</term></item><item><term>predictors</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2006-07-08">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1460-6984</doi><issn type="print">1368-2822</issn><issn type="electronic">1460-6984</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="JLCD"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION DISORDERS">International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="07104"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/jlcd.2006.41.issue-4</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="41">41</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="4">4</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2006-07-08">July‐August 2006</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="4" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1080/13682820600623853</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="JLCD652"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="12"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original Article</title></titleGroup><copyright>2006 Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists</copyright><eventGroup><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.4.2 mode:FullText" date="2010-12-30"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="2010-12-31"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2010-12-31"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-31"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-24"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="395">395</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="406">406</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, 3086, Australia <email>s.block@latrobe.edu.au</email></correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:JLCD.JLCD652.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory>Received 17 August 2005; accepted 3 December 2006</unparsedEditorialHistory><countGroup><count type="referenceTotal" number="40"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="5"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1" corresponding="yes"><personName><givenNames>Susan</givenNames><familyName>Block</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Mark</givenNames><familyName>Onslow</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Ann</givenNames><familyName>Packman</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr4" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Georgia</givenNames><familyName>Dacakis</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="AU"><unparsedAffiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="AU"><unparsedAffiliation>Australian Stuttering Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">stuttering</keyword><keyword xml:id="k2">management</keyword><keyword xml:id="k3">measurement</keyword><keyword xml:id="k4">outcomes</keyword><keyword xml:id="k5">predictors</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">Abstract</title><p><i>Background</i>: Clinical trials have shown that behavioural treatments based on variants of prolonged‐speech (PS) are best practice for reducing the stuttering rate in adults. However, while stuttering is significantly reduced or eliminated for most adults in the short‐term with such treatment, relapse in the longer‐term is common. Consequently, there has been interest in attempting to establish variables that predict responsiveness to PS‐based treatments. Identifying such variables would enable risk prediction and also contribute to the tailoring of treatments to suit individuals who are less likely to benefit in the long‐term from the conventional PS‐based treatments. Variables that have been investigated to date are the stuttering severity, the attitude to communication and the locus of control.</p><p><i>Aims</i>: The present study revisited this issue with methodological improvements.</p><p><i>Methods & Procedures</i>: Prospective, continuous measures of outcome several years after treatment, and well‐powered, least‐squares multivariate regression, with backwards elimination, were used to determine the best model to predict short‐ and long‐term outcomes of a PS‐based treatment. Other predictor variables were also included. The stuttering rates of 78 participants were measured immediately after the intensive stage of treatment, and during a surprize telephone call 3.5–5 years after treatment.</p><p><i>Outcomes & Results</i>: Attitude to communication and locus of control were separate constructs to stuttering rate. While the stuttering rate predicted outcome, neither of the two non‐behavioural variables predicted outcome in either the short‐ or the long‐term.</p><p><i>Conclusions</i>: The most significant finding is that the non‐behavioural variables of attitude to communication and locus of control did not predict treatment outcomes. This is contrary to the findings of most previous studies.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Susan</namePart><namePart type="family">Block</namePart><affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: s.block@latrobe.edu.au</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Mark</namePart><namePart type="family">Onslow</namePart><affiliation>Australian Stuttering Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Ann</namePart><namePart type="family">Packman</namePart><affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Georgia</namePart><namePart type="family">Dacakis</namePart><affiliation>School of Human Communication Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2006-07-08</dateIssued><edition>Received 17 August 2005; accepted 3 December 2006</edition><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2006</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="references">40</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Background: Clinical trials have shown that behavioural treatments based on variants of prolonged‐speech (PS) are best practice for reducing the stuttering rate in adults. However, while stuttering is significantly reduced or eliminated for most adults in the short‐term with such treatment, relapse in the longer‐term is common. Consequently, there has been interest in attempting to establish variables that predict responsiveness to PS‐based treatments. Identifying such variables would enable risk prediction and also contribute to the tailoring of treatments to suit individuals who are less likely to benefit in the long‐term from the conventional PS‐based treatments. Variables that have been investigated to date are the stuttering severity, the attitude to communication and the locus of control. Aims: The present study revisited this issue with methodological improvements. Methods & Procedures: Prospective, continuous measures of outcome several years after treatment, and well‐powered, least‐squares multivariate regression, with backwards elimination, were used to determine the best model to predict short‐ and long‐term outcomes of a PS‐based treatment. Other predictor variables were also included. The stuttering rates of 78 participants were measured immediately after the intensive stage of treatment, and during a surprize telephone call 3.5–5 years after treatment. Outcomes & Results: Attitude to communication and locus of control were separate constructs to stuttering rate. While the stuttering rate predicted outcome, neither of the two non‐behavioural variables predicted outcome in either the short‐ or the long‐term. Conclusions: The most significant finding is that the non‐behavioural variables of attitude to communication and locus of control did not predict treatment outcomes. This is contrary to the findings of most previous studies.</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>stuttering</topic><topic>management</topic><topic>measurement</topic><topic>outcomes</topic><topic>predictors</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">1368-2822</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1460-6984</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1460-6984</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">JLCD</identifier><part><date>2006</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>41</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>4</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>395</start><end>406</end><total>12</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1080/13682820600623853</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">JLCD652</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">2006 Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001928 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001928 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Rhénanie
|area= UnivTrevesV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:DBD5DAAFEA4E1D8DFC7C39BACF1C358D4CE76A12
|texte= Connecting stuttering management and measurement: IV. Predictors of outcome for a behavioural treatment for stuttering
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |