TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing Childhood Stuttering Recovery
T2 - Incorporating Self-Identification and Caregiver/Clinician Reports Through Adolescence
AU - Treleaven, Shanley
AU - Rubsam, Saralyn
AU - Sheppard, Megan
AU - Yaruss, J. Scott
AU - Chang, Soo Eun
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
PY - 2025/5
Y1 - 2025/5
N2 - Purpose: Investigating stuttering recovery rates can be challenging, as recovery status can change based on self-report, later recovery, or relapse. In this study, we contacted previous child participants from our longitudinal studies (now older children to young adults) who were originally assigned persistence/recovery status guided by clinician and caregiver reports only. Their stuttering status as adolescents and young adults was re-evaluated based on currently assessed clinician and care-giver reports, observable stuttering severity assessments, and self-reports. Method: Seventy-nine participants were contacted based on their current age and time since their last longitudinal study visit (> 2 years). Of these, 23 partici-pated in this follow-up investigation. Participants and caregivers completed follow-up questionnaires, and participants’ speech samples were recorded for offline stuttering disfluency ratings by a speech-language pathologist. Results: When considering participant and caregiver reports as well as clinician report based on stuttering severity ratings, recovery status changed for nine of the 23 participants (39.13%). All nine self-identified as recovered, although four of the nine were judged to exhibit very mild stuttering. Five of the nine were viewed to be late recovery cases, occurring after the conclusion of the prior longitudinal study. The presence of stuttering behaviors was often reported consistently across clinician and participant/caregiver reports (the basis for “persistence” judgments by the clinician), but in eight cases (34.78%), participants did not self-identify as stutterers despite reported presence of stuttering. Conclusions: Our results highlight the importance of assessing stuttering beyond early childhood to examine recovery rates. Furthermore, self-reports on stuttering status reveal that the concept of recovery is nuanced: The presence of overt stuttering does not necessarily correlate with self-identification of stuttering. These findings have implications on how best to define stuttering persistence and recovery for future research and clinical practice.
AB - Purpose: Investigating stuttering recovery rates can be challenging, as recovery status can change based on self-report, later recovery, or relapse. In this study, we contacted previous child participants from our longitudinal studies (now older children to young adults) who were originally assigned persistence/recovery status guided by clinician and caregiver reports only. Their stuttering status as adolescents and young adults was re-evaluated based on currently assessed clinician and care-giver reports, observable stuttering severity assessments, and self-reports. Method: Seventy-nine participants were contacted based on their current age and time since their last longitudinal study visit (> 2 years). Of these, 23 partici-pated in this follow-up investigation. Participants and caregivers completed follow-up questionnaires, and participants’ speech samples were recorded for offline stuttering disfluency ratings by a speech-language pathologist. Results: When considering participant and caregiver reports as well as clinician report based on stuttering severity ratings, recovery status changed for nine of the 23 participants (39.13%). All nine self-identified as recovered, although four of the nine were judged to exhibit very mild stuttering. Five of the nine were viewed to be late recovery cases, occurring after the conclusion of the prior longitudinal study. The presence of stuttering behaviors was often reported consistently across clinician and participant/caregiver reports (the basis for “persistence” judgments by the clinician), but in eight cases (34.78%), participants did not self-identify as stutterers despite reported presence of stuttering. Conclusions: Our results highlight the importance of assessing stuttering beyond early childhood to examine recovery rates. Furthermore, self-reports on stuttering status reveal that the concept of recovery is nuanced: The presence of overt stuttering does not necessarily correlate with self-identification of stuttering. These findings have implications on how best to define stuttering persistence and recovery for future research and clinical practice.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105004936912
U2 - 10.1044/2025_JSLHR-24-00501
DO - 10.1044/2025_JSLHR-24-00501
M3 - Article
C2 - 40268734
AN - SCOPUS:105004936912
SN - 1092-4388
VL - 68
SP - 2218
EP - 2235
JO - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
JF - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
IS - 5
ER -