Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Speech Handicap Index

References

• Pribuisiene R, Liutkevicius V, Pribuisis K, et al. Validation of the Lithuanian version of the speech handicap index. J Voice. 2018;32:385.e1–385.e6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park SS, Choi SH, Hong JA, et al. Validity and reliability of the Korean version of the Speech Handicap Index in patients with oral cavity cancer. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;45:433–439.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandenburg C, Worrall L, Copland D, et al. An exploratory investigation of the daily talk time of people with non-fluent aphasia and non-aphasic peers. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017;19:418–429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunton K, Kent RD, Duffy JR, et al. Listener agreement for auditory-perceptual ratings of dysarthria. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007;50:1481–1495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent RD, Weismer G, Kent JF, et al. Acoustic studies of dysarthric speech: methods, progress, and potential. J Commun Disord. 1999;32:141–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiel C, Yang J, Crawley B, et al. Aerodynamic characteristics of syllable and sentence productions in normal speakers. J Voice. 2019;33:297–301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim Y, Zhu Y, Lingala SG, et al. 3D dynamic MRI of the vocal tract during natural speech. Magn Reson Med. 2019;81:1511–1520.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walshe M, Peach RK, Miller N. Dysarthria impact profile: development of a scale to measure psychosocial effects. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2009;44:693–715.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piacentini V, Zuin A, Cattaneo D, et al. Reliability and validity of an instrument to measure quality of life in the dysarthric speaker. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2011;63:289–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blood GW. Development and assessment of a scale addressing communication needs of patients with laryngectomies. Am J Speech-Lang Pathol. 1993;2:82–90.
   Google Scholar
• Frattali CM. Measuring modality-specific behaviours, functional abilities and quality of life In: Frattali CM, editor. Measuring outcomes in speech and language pathology. New York (NY): Tieme; 1997. p. 55–88.
   Google Scholar
• Degroote G, Simon J, Borel S, et al. The French version of speech handicap index: validation and comparison with the Voice Handicap Index. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2012;64:20–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The WHOQOL Group. The World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQOL). Development and psychometric properties. Soc Sci Med. 1998;46:1569–1585.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rinkel RN, Leeuw IM, van Reij EJ, et al. Speech handicap index in patients with oral and pharyngeal cancer: better understanding of patients’ complaints. Head Neck. 2008;30:868–874.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjordal K, Hammerlid E, Ahlner-Elmqvist M, et al. Quality of life in head and neck cancer patients: validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-H&N35. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1008–1019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schindler A, Ottaviani F, Mozzanica F, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the voice handicap index into Italian. J Voice. 2010;24:708–714.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schindler A, Mozzanica F, Brignoli F, et al. Reliability and validity of the Italian self-evaluation of communication experiences after laryngeal cancer questionnaire. Head Neck. 2013;35:1606–1615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dwivedi RC, Rose SS, Roe JWG, et al. First report on the reliability and validity of speech handicap index (SHI) in native English-speaking head and neck cancer patients. Head Neck. 2012;33:341–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li T, Ma L, Mao C. The validation and reliability of the Chinese version of the Speech Handicap Index for patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancer. J Voice. 2016;247:e23–e31.
   Google Scholar
• Darley FL, Aronson AE, Brown JR. Differential diagnostic patterns of dysarthria. J Speech Hear Res. 1969;12:246–269.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, et al. International consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health‐related patient‐reported outcomes: results of the COSMIN study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:737–745.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, et al. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186–3191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ginocchio D, Alfonsi E, Mozzanica F, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Italian version of SWAL-QOL. Dysphagia. 2016;31:626–634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vittinghoff E, Glidden DV, Shiboski SC, et al. Regression methods in biostatistics: linear, logistic, survival, and repeated measures models. New York (NY): Springer; 2005. p. 254–258.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan GM, Feinn R. Using effect size – or why the p value is not enough. J Grad Med Educ. 2012;4:279–282.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Clark LA, Watson D. Constructing validity: basic issues in objective scale development. In: Kazdin AE, editor. Methodological issues & strategies in clinical research. 3rd ed. Washington: APA; 2003. p. 207–231.
   Google Scholar
• Vittinghoff E, Glidden DV, Shiboski SC, et al. Regression methods in biostatistics: linear, logistic, survival, and repeated measures models. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 254–258.
   Google Scholar
• Unal I. Defining an optimal cut-point value in ROC analysis: an alternative approach. Comput Math Methods Med. 2017;2017:3762651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enderby P. Frenchay dysarthria assessment. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 1980;15:165–173.
   Google Scholar