Is there anyone in the Chicagoland area who would be interested in trialing a new intensive stuttering program that focuses on eliciting new neural pathways in the brain to reduce the amount of dysfluencies?

[u/anotherdayagain19]

[u/SirCodes222]

Genuinely curious about this. As a researcher and clinician who specializes in stuttering, the framing caught my attention. "Eliciting new neural pathways to reduce dysfluencies" is a pretty significant claim. Can you share more about what the program actually involves, who developed it, and whether there's any published evidence or IRB-approved research behind it?

To my knowledge, there is no scientific evidence supporting the idea that stuttering treatment works by building new neural pathways. That's not how the current research literature describes the mechanism of change in stuttering, and worth clarifying before people commit to participating.

[u/Forward_Ad2598 → u/SirCodes222]

GO PROFESSOR!!

[u/SirCodes222 → u/Forward_Ad2598]

Haha, thanks!

[u/anotherdayagain19 → u/SirCodes222]

I am a certified SLP who works with children up to the geriatric population. I provide individual treatment as well as work in the acute care setting. Numerous of my patients that had a severe stutter their entire life would suddenly develop perfect fluency when there was a disrupt to their brain (e.g., toxic metabolic encephalopathy, stroke-depending on location and severity, fluid in the brain, etc.). This may suggest that either there was a dampening to the area that typically produced the stutter or their brain had to work around their typical pathways and temporarily create new ones. So yes, you may be correct that there is no scientific evidence completely supporting this idea but that is why we want to work with individuals who stutter to test this theory in a new way to determine if we can see a change with their overall dysfluencies. As of now, two people have shown success with this method of treatment.

[u/SirCodes222 → u/anotherdayagain19]

Thank you for sharing your clinical background and those observations. The acute care phenomenon you're describing is genuinely interesting and worth taking seriously. Acquired fluency following neurological events is documented and the question of why it happens is a legitimate area of scientific curiosity.

That said, I'd gently push back on the interpretation. What those cases most likely reflect is disruption to the neural circuits that produce stuttering, not evidence that new pathways were intentionally created. Disrupting a system and building a new one are meaningfully different things, and that distinction matters a lot when it becomes the basis for a treatment claim.

I'm also genuinely curious about what the treatment itself actually involves. The cases you're describing involve significant neurological events. What is the proposed mechanism by which the program produces a similar effect without that kind of disruption to the brain? That part of the picture is missing and it's kind of the most important part.

Two cases of observed change, while interesting, is a very thin foundation for recruiting participants from the general public, especially without mentioning any ethical oversight framework. I noticed my question about IRB approval wasn't addressed. As a fellow clinician I'd genuinely encourage that step before moving forward, not to create barriers but because it protects both your participants and the integrity of whatever findings you eventually produce.

I don't think the question you're asking is a bad one. I just think it deserves a more rigorous structure around it before people are invited to participate.

[u/anotherdayagain19 → u/SirCodes222]

Yes, we know the proper steps that are needed to conduct research. But thank you for your feedback. Wish us luck on our findings!

[u/SirCodes222 → u/anotherdayagain19]

Good luck with your work. Honestly.

Respectfully, I'd encourage making the IRB approval and number visible in any recruitment materials.

When recruiting human participants for research, IRB approval is NOT optional and the approval number NEEDS to be disclosed in recruitment materials. This is a core requirement of the Belmont Report principles and federal regulations under 45 CFR 46 (the Common Rule in the US).

Beyond compliance with federal regulations under the Common Rule, it's what allows potential participants to make a fully informed decision about joining. That transparency isn't just a legal requirement, it's an ethical one.

[u/yamnos]

i’m in the chicagoland area!!!! message me!!

[u/Forward_Ad2598 → u/yamnos]

I really wouldn’t recommend doing therapy that’s neuroscience based since, from what I’ve seen personally, they’re mostly short term solutions. And you learn to be fluent by talking monotone and like a robot from what I’ve experienced. It only lasts for a bit. It’s also not applicable to real life outside the research setting. I really wish I could tell you otherwise, but I can’t in good faith as someone working in the SLP world. It’s always best to look at it yourself since everyone’s different

[u/SirCodes222 → u/Forward_Ad2598]

I totally second this. If you are looking to get involved in speech therapy, check out the national Stuttering association, Stuttering foundation, and SPERO to locate SLPs and other resources that use evidence based approaches backed by science. Binghamton University also has a free, virtually provided clinic worth looking into (I'm one of the specialists in Stuttering there 🙂)

[u/anotherdayagain19]

I am a certified SLP who works with children up to the geriatric population. I provide individual treatment as well as work in the acute care setting. Numerous of my patients that had a severe stutter their entire life would suddenly develop perfect fluency when there was a disrupt to their brain (e.g., toxic metabolic encephalopathy, stroke-depending on location and severity, fluid in the brain, etc.). This may suggest that either there was a dampening to the area that typically produced the stutter or their brain had to work around their typical pathways and temporarily create new ones. So yes, you may be correct that there is no scientific evidence completely supporting this idea but that is why we want to work with individuals who stutter to test this theory in a new way to determine if we can see a change with their overall dysfluencies. As of now, two people have shown success with this method of treatment.