Christiane Neuschaefer-Rube

We developed an e-learning tool in augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) for medical students in Germany and tested it at Rhenish-Westphalian Technical University, Aachen. Our cross-sectional evaluation study is an innovative approach since the topic is yet to be implemented in medical education. Other AAC tools do not target medical students. Our study underlines the importance of AAC for medical doctors. Universities should include AAC in their lectures to prepare medical students for their clinical practice. The “ AAC HEN” tool is a first step.

Background: Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is a therapeutic approach and modality of expression for patients with limited or no expressive language. Speech-language pathologists and phoniatricians need to be competent in AAC to treat patients with complex communication needs. For knowledge acquisition and enhancement in AAC, a significant number of e-learning tools are available. To improve e-learning in AAC, it is essential to understand the attributes of these tools, such as formats, content areas, learning styles, or learning goals. However, these structures have yet to be investigated. Objective: With this study, we aimed to (1) explore free access AAC e-learning tools that are appropriate for students and professionals of phoniatrics and speech-language pathology; (2) gain insight into formats, content areas, learning styles, and learning goals; and (3) investigate structural differences within and between basic and advanced learner level. Methods: In 2023, we conducted a systematic web-based search with defined search terms in PubMed, peDOCS, Google Scholar, Google, the Apple App Store, and the Google Play Store in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines and piloting a protocol for data abstraction and validation. Inclusion criteria were free access, a mandatory minimum AAC content, and the use of the English or the German language. Social networks, video-sharing platforms, blogs, and forums were excluded. We analyzed formats (websites, online courses, apps, and podcasts), content areas (types of AAC, diagnostics, therapy, and other content areas), learning styles (visual, auditory, and audio-visual), and learning goals (receptive and performative) within and between basic and advanced level tools. Results: We identified 131 tools, of which 57 (43.5%) were basic level and 74 (56.5%) were advanced level. Of these 131 tools, 105 (80.2%) were websites, 21 (16%) were online courses, 3 (2.3%) were apps and 2 (1.5%) were podcasts. Only 12 out of 74 (16.2%) tools for advanced learners offered performative tasks. For basic learners no such tasks could be identified. For learning style, all basic tools and most of the advanced level tools were “visual (text)” (57/57, 100% basic vs 66/74, 89.2% advanced). In terms of content, advanced level tools pertained more often to “diagnostics” (28/57, 49.1% basic vs 65/74, 87.8% advanced) and “therapy” (17/57, 29.8% basic vs 64/74, 86.5% advanced). Advanced level courses were more likely online courses (2/57, 3.5% basic vs 19/74, 25.7% advanced) and more often showed audio-visual learning styles compared with basic level tools (5/57, 8.8% basic vs 27/74, 36.5% advanced). Conclusions: Our study showed that free-access AAC tools for phoniatrics and speech-language pathology varied in formats, content areas, learning styles, and learning goals. Furthermore, we found differences within and between learner levels. Thus, we established a basis for future research in e-learning in AAC.

In speech production, the anatomical morphology forms the substrate on which the speakers build their articulatory strategy to reach specific articulatory-acoustic goals. The aim of this study is to characterize morphological inter-speaker variability by building a shape model of the full vocal tract including hard and soft structures. Static magnetic resonance imaging data from 41 speakers articulating altogether 1947 phonemes were considered, and the midsagittal articulator contours were manually outlined. A phoneme-independent average-articulation representative of morphology was calculated as the speaker mean articulation. A principal component analysis-driven shape model was derived from average-articulations, leading to five morphological components, which explained 87% of the variance. Almost three-quarters of the variance was related to independent variations of the horizontal oral and vertical pharyngeal lengths, the latter capturing male-female differences. The three additional components captured shape variations related to head tilt and palate shape. Plane wave propagation acoustic simulations were run to characterize morphological components. A lengthening of 1 cm of the vocal tract in the vertical or horizontal directions led to a decrease in formant values of 7%–8%. Further analyses are required to analyze three-dimensional variability and to understand the morphological-acoustic relationships per phoneme. Average-articulations and model code are publicly available (https://github.com/tonioser/VTMorphologicalModel).

Background: The digital age has introduced opportunities and challenges for clinical education and practice caused by infinite incoming information and novel technologies for health. In the interdisciplinary field of communication sciences and disorders (CSD), engagement with digital topics has emerged slower than in other health fields, and effective strategies for accessing, managing, and focusing on digital resources are greatly needed. Objective: We aimed to conceptualize and investigate preferences of stakeholders regarding a digital learning toolbox, an app containing a library of current resources for CSD. This cross-sectional survey study conducted in German-speaking countries investigated professional and student perceptions and preferences regarding such an app’s features, functions, content, and associated concerns. Methods: An open web-based survey was disseminated to professionals and students in the field of CSD, including speech-language pathologists (SLPs; German: Logopäd*innen), speech-language pathology students, phoniatricians, otolaryngologists, and medical students. Insights into preferences and perceptions across professions, generations, and years of experience regarding a proposed app were investigated. Results: Of the 164 participants, an overwhelming majority (n=162, 98.8%) indicated readiness to use such an app, and most participants (n=159, 96.9%) perceived the proposed app to be helpful. Participants positively rated app functions that would increase utility (eg, tutorial, quality rating function, filters based on content or topic, and digital format); however, they had varied opinions regarding an app community feature. Regarding app settings, most participants rated the option to share digital resources through social media links (144/164, 87.8%), receive and manage push notifications (130/164, 79.3%), and report technical issues (160/164, 97.6%) positively. However, significant variance was noted across professions (H3=8.006; P=.046) and generations (H3=9.309; P=.03) regarding a username-password function, with SLPs indicating greater perceived usefulness in comparison to speech-language pathology students (P=.045), as was demonstrated by Generation X versus Generation Z (P=.04). Participants perceived a range of clinical topics to be important; however, significant variance was observed across professions, between physicians and SLPs regarding the topic of diagnostics (H3=9.098; P=.03) and therapy (H3=21.236; P<.001). Concerns included technical challenges, data protection, quality of the included resources, and sustainability of the proposed app. Conclusions: This investigation demonstrated that professionals and students show initial readiness to engage in the co-design and use of an interdisciplinary digital learning toolbox app. Specifically, this app could support effective access, sharing, evaluation, and knowledge management in a digital age of rapid change. Formalized digital skills education in the field of CSD is just a part of the solution. It will be crucial to explore flexible, adaptive strategies collaboratively for managing digital resources and tools to optimize targeted selection and use of relevant, high-quality evidence in a world of bewildering data.

Cough is a very common symptom and the most frequent reason for seeking medical advice. Optimized care goes inevitably through an adapted recording of this symptom and automatic processing. This study provides an updated exhaustive quantitative review of the field of cough sound acquisition, automatic detection in longer audio sequences and automatic classification of the nature or disease. Related studies were analyzed and metrics extracted and processed to create a quantitative characterization of the state-of-the-art and trends. A list of objective criteria was established to select a subset of the most complete detection studies in the perspective of deployment in clinical practice. One hundred and forty-four studies were short-listed, and a picture of the state-of-the-art technology is drawn. The trend shows an increasing number of classification studies, an increase of the dataset size, in part from crowdsourcing, a rapid increase of COVID-19 studies, the prevalence of smartphones and wearable sensors for the acquisition, and a rapid expansion of deep learning. Finally, a subset of 12 detection studies is identified as the most complete ones. An unequaled quantitative overview is presented. The field shows a remarkable dynamic, boosted by the research on COVID-19 diagnosis, and a perfect adaptation to mobile health.

Background: Advances in digital health and digital learning are transforming the lives of patients, health care providers, and health professional students. In the interdisciplinary field of communication sciences and disorders (CSD), digital uptake and incorporation of digital topics and technologies into clinical training programs has lagged behind other medical fields. There is a need to understand professional and student experiences, opinions, and needs regarding digital health and learning topics so that effective strategies for implementation can be optimized. Objective: This cross-sectional survey study aims to interdisciplinarily investigate professional and student knowledge, use, attitudes, and preferences toward digital health and learning in the German-speaking population. Methods: An open-ended, web-based survey was developed and conducted with professionals and students in CSD including phoniatricians and otolaryngologists, speech-language pathologists (German: Logopäd*innen), medical students, and speech-language pathology students. Differences in knowledge, use, attitudes, and preferences across profession, generation, and years of experience were analyzed. Results: A total of 170 participants completed the survey. Respondents demonstrated greater familiarity with digital learning as opposed to eHealth concepts. Significant differences were noted across profession (P<.001), generation (P=.001), and years of experience (P<.001), which demonstrated that students and younger participants were less familiar with digital health terminology. Professional (P<.001) and generational differences were also found (P=.04) in knowledge of digital therapy tools, though no significant differences were found for digital learning tools. Participants primarily used computers, tablets, and mobile phones; non–eHealth-specific tools (eg, word processing and videoconferencing applications); and digital formats such as videos, web courses, and apps. Many indicated a desire for more interactive platforms, such as virtual reality. Significant differences were found across generations for positive views toward digitalization (P<.001) and across profession for feelings of preparedness (P=.04). Interestingly, across profession (P=.03), generation (P=.006), and years of experience (P=.01), students and younger participants demonstrated greater support for medical certification. Commonly reported areas of concern included technical difficulties, quality and validity of digital materials, data privacy, and social presence. Respondents tended to prefer blended learning, a limited to moderate level of interactivity, and time and space–flexible learning environments (63/170, 37.1%), with a notable proportion still preferring traditional time and space–dependent learning (49/170, 28.8%). Conclusions: This comprehensive investigation into the current state of CSD student and professional opinions and experiences has shown that incorporation of digital topics and skills into academic and professional development curricula will be crucial for ensuring that the field is prepared for the ever-digitalizing health care environment. Deeper empirical investigation into efficacy and acceptance of digital learning and practice strategies and systematic training and practical organizational supports must be planned to ensure adaptive education and practice.

BACKGROUND The digital age has introduced opportunities and challenges for clinical education and practice caused by infinite incoming information and novel technologies for health. In the interdisciplinary field of communication sciences and disorders (CSD), engagement with digital topics has emerged slower than in other health fields, and effective strategies for accessing, managing, and focusing on digital resources are greatly needed. OBJECTIVE We aimed to conceptualize and investigate preferences of stakeholders regarding a digital learning toolbox, an app containing a library of current resources for CSD. This cross-sectional survey study conducted in German-speaking countries investigated professional and student perceptions and preferences regarding such an app’s features, functions, content, and associated concerns. METHODS An open web-based survey was disseminated to professionals and students in the field of CSD, including speech-language pathologists (SLPs; German: Logopäd*innen), speech-language pathology students, phoniatricians, otolaryngologists, and medical students. Insights into preferences and perceptions across professions, generations, and years of experience regarding a proposed app were investigated. RESULTS Of the 164 participants, an overwhelming majority (n=162, 98.8%) indicated readiness to use such an app, and most participants (n=159, 96.9%) perceived the proposed app to be helpful. Participants positively rated app functions that would increase utility (eg, tutorial, quality rating function, filters based on content or topic, and digital format); however, they had varied opinions regarding an app community feature. Regarding app settings, most participants rated the option to share digital resources through social media links (144/164, 87.8%), receive and manage push notifications (130/164, 79.3%), and report technical issues (160/164, 97.6%) positively. However, significant variance was noted across professions (H3=8.006; P=.046) and generations (H3=9.309; P=.03) regarding a username-password function, with SLPs indicating greater perceived usefulness in comparison to speech-language pathology students (P=.045), as was demonstrated by Generation X versus Generation Z (P=.04). Participants perceived a range of clinical topics to be important; however, significant variance was observed across professions, between physicians and SLPs regarding the topic of diagnostics (H3=9.098; P=.03) and therapy (H3=21.236; P<.001). Concerns included technical challenges, data protection, quality of the included resources, and sustainability of the proposed app. CONCLUSIONS This investigation demonstrated that professionals and students show initial readiness to engage in the co-design and use of an interdisciplinary digital learning toolbox app. Specifically, this app could support effective access, sharing, evaluation, and knowledge management in a digital age of rapid change. Formalized digital skills education in the field of CSD is just a part of the solution. It will be crucial to explore flexible, adaptive strategies collaboratively for managing digital resources and tools to optimize targeted selection and use of relevant, high-quality evidence in a world of bewildering data.

Background: The digital revolution is rapidly transforming health care and clinical teaching and learning. Relative to other medical fields, the interdisciplinary fields of speech-language pathology (SLP), phoniatrics, and otolaryngology have been slower to take up digital tools for therapeutic, teaching, and learning purposes—a process that was recently expedited by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although many current teaching and learning tools have restricted or institution-only access, there are many openly accessible tools that have gone largely unexplored. To find, use, and evaluate such resources, it is important to be familiar with the structures, concepts, and formats of existing digital tools. Objective: This descriptive study aims to investigate digital learning tools and resources in SLP, phoniatrics, and otolaryngology. Differences in content, learning goals, and digital formats between academic-level learners and clinical-professional learners are explored. Methods: A systematic search of generic and academic search engines (eg, Google and PubMed); the App Store; Google Play Store; and websites of established SLP, phoniatrics, and otolaryngology organizations was conducted. By using specific search terms and detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria, relevant digital resources were identified. These were organized and analyzed according to learner groups, content matter, learning goals and architectures, and digital formats. Results: Within- and between-learner group differences among 125 identified tools were investigated. In terms of content, the largest proportion of tools for academic-level learners pertained to anatomy and physiology (60/214, 28%), and that for clinical-professional learners pertained to diagnostic evaluation (47/185, 25.4%). Between groups, the largest differences were observed for anatomy and physiology (academic-level learners: 60/86, 70%; clinical-professional learners: 26/86, 30%) and professional issues (8/28, 29% vs 20/28, 71%). With regard to learning goals, most tools for academic-level learners targeted the performance of procedural skills (50/98, 51%), and those for clinical-professional learners targeted receptive information acquisition (44/62, 71%). Academic-level learners had more tools for supporting higher-level learning goals than clinical-professional learners, specifically tools for performing procedural skills (50/66, 76% vs 16/66, 24%) and strategic skills (8/10, 80% vs 2/10, 20%). Visual formats (eg, pictures or diagrams) were dominant across both learner groups. The greatest between-group differences were observed for interactive formats (45/66, 68% vs 21/66, 32%). Conclusions: This investigation provides initial insights into openly accessible tools across SLP, phoniatrics, and otolaryngology and their organizing structures. Digital tools in these fields addressed diverse content, although the tools for academic-level learners were greater in number, targeted higher-level learning goals, and had more interactive formats than those for clinical-professional learners. The crucial next steps include investigating the actual use of such tools in practice and students’ and professionals’ attitudes to better improve upon such tools and incorporate them into current and future learning milieus.

BACKGROUND Advances in digital health and digital learning are transforming the lives of patients, health care providers, and health professional students. In the interdisciplinary field of communication sciences and disorders (CSD), digital uptake and incorporation of digital topics and technologies into clinical training programs has lagged behind other medical fields. There is a need to understand professional and student experiences, opinions, and needs regarding digital health and learning topics so that effective strategies for implementation can be optimized. OBJECTIVE This cross-sectional survey study aims to interdisciplinarily investigate professional and student knowledge, use, attitudes, and preferences toward digital health and learning in the German-speaking population. METHODS An open-ended, web-based survey was developed and conducted with professionals and students in CSD including phoniatricians and otolaryngologists, speech-language pathologists (German: Logopäd*innen), medical students, and speech-language pathology students. Differences in knowledge, use, attitudes, and preferences across profession, generation, and years of experience were analyzed. RESULTS A total of 170 participants completed the survey. Respondents demonstrated greater familiarity with digital learning as opposed to eHealth concepts. Significant differences were noted across profession (P<.001), generation (P=.001), and years of experience (P<.001), which demonstrated that students and younger participants were less familiar with digital health terminology. Professional (P<.001) and generational differences were also found (P=.04) in knowledge of digital therapy tools, though no significant differences were found for digital learning tools. Participants primarily used computers, tablets, and mobile phones; non–eHealth-specific tools (eg, word processing and videoconferencing applications); and digital formats such as videos, web courses, and apps. Many indicated a desire for more interactive platforms, such as virtual reality. Significant differences were found across generations for positive views toward digitalization (P<.001) and across profession for feelings of preparedness (P=.04). Interestingly, across profession (P=.03), generation (P=.006), and years of experience (P=.01), students and younger participants demonstrated greater support for medical certification. Commonly reported areas of concern included technical difficulties, quality and validity of digital materials, data privacy, and social presence. Respondents tended to prefer blended learning, a limited to moderate level of interactivity, and time and space–flexible learning environments (63/170, 37.1%), with a notable proportion still preferring traditional time and space–dependent learning (49/170, 28.8%). CONCLUSIONS This comprehensive investigation into the current state of CSD student and professional opinions and experiences has shown that incorporation of digital topics and skills into academic and professional development curricula will be crucial for ensuring that the field is prepared for the ever-digitalizing health care environment. Deeper empirical investigation into efficacy and acceptance of digital learning and practice strategies and systematic training and practical organizational supports must be planned to ensure adaptive education and practice. CLINICALTRIAL

BACKGROUND The digital revolution is rapidly transforming health care and clinical teaching and learning. Relative to other medical fields, the interdisciplinary fields of speech-language pathology (SLP), phoniatrics, and otolaryngology have been slower to take up digital tools for therapeutic, teaching, and learning purposes—a process that was recently expedited by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although many current teaching and learning tools have restricted or institution-only access, there are many openly accessible tools that have gone largely unexplored. To find, use, and evaluate such resources, it is important to be familiar with the structures, concepts, and formats of existing digital tools. OBJECTIVE This descriptive study aims to investigate digital learning tools and resources in SLP, phoniatrics, and otolaryngology. Differences in content, learning goals, and digital formats between academic-level learners and clinical-professional learners are explored. METHODS A systematic search of generic and academic search engines (eg, Google and PubMed); the App Store; Google Play Store; and websites of established SLP, phoniatrics, and otolaryngology organizations was conducted. By using specific search terms and detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria, relevant digital resources were identified. These were organized and analyzed according to learner groups, content matter, learning goals and architectures, and digital formats. RESULTS Within- and between-learner group differences among 125 identified tools were investigated. In terms of content, the largest proportion of tools for academic-level learners pertained to anatomy and physiology (60/214, 28%), and that for clinical-professional learners pertained to diagnostic evaluation (47/185, 25.4%). Between groups, the largest differences were observed for anatomy and physiology (academic-level learners: 60/86, 70%; clinical-professional learners: 26/86, 30%) and professional issues (8/28, 29% vs 20/28, 71%). With regard to learning goals, most tools for academic-level learners targeted the performance of procedural skills (50/98, 51%), and those for clinical-professional learners targeted receptive information acquisition (44/62, 71%). Academic-level learners had more tools for supporting higher-level learning goals than clinical-professional learners, specifically tools for performing procedural skills (50/66, 76% vs 16/66, 24%) and strategic skills (8/10, 80% vs 2/10, 20%). Visual formats (eg, pictures or diagrams) were dominant across both learner groups. The greatest between-group differences were observed for interactive formats (45/66, 68% vs 21/66, 32%). CONCLUSIONS This investigation provides initial insights into openly accessible tools across SLP, phoniatrics, and otolaryngology and their organizing structures. Digital tools in these fields addressed diverse content, although the tools for academic-level learners were greater in number, targeted higher-level learning goals, and had more interactive formats than those for clinical-professional learners. The crucial next steps include investigating the actual use of such tools in practice and students’ and professionals’ attitudes to better improve upon such tools and incorporate them into current and future learning milieus.