Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22863021›Full record

Trial reportBMC pediatrics2012

A comparison of two treatments for childhood apraxia of speech: methods and treatment protocol for a parallel group randomised control trial.

Elizabeth Murray, Patricia McCabe, Kirrie J Ballard

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pediatrics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04962828 (The Effect Of An Inter Disciplinary Approach On Vocabulary Development in Children With Hearing Impairment; A Randomized Control Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04962828 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

The Effect Of An Inter Disciplinary Approach On Vocabulary Development in Children With Hearing Impairment; A Randomized Control Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorRiphah International UniversityRan2021 to 2021Enrolled20ConditionsHearing Impaired ChildrenArmsVocabulary based intervention- Non Collaborative, Vocabulary based intervention - Collaborative
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interventions for childhood apraxia of speech.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Ultrasound visual feedback treatment and practice variability for residual speech sound errors.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2014
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elizabeth MurraySpeech Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, PO Box 170, Lidcombe, 1825, Sydney, Australia. elizabeth.murray@sydney.edu.au
Patricia McCabe
Kirrie J Ballard
University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChildhood Apraxia of Speech is an impairment of speech motor planning that manifests as difficulty producing the sounds (articulation) and melody (prosody) of speech. These difficulties may persist through life and are detrimental to academic, social, and vocational development. A number of published single subject and case series studies of speech treatments are available. There are currently no randomised control trials or other well designed group trials available to guide clinical practice. METHODS/

designA parallel group, fixed size randomised control trial will be conducted in Sydney, Australia to determine the efficacy of two treatments for Childhood Apraxia of Speech: 1) Rapid Syllable Transition Treatment and the 2) Nuffield Dyspraxia Programme - Third edition. Eligible children will be English speaking, aged 4-12 years with a diagnosis of suspected CAS, normal or adjusted hearing and vision, and no comprehension difficulties or other developmental diagnoses. At least 20 children will be randomised to receive one of the two treatments in parallel. Treatments will be delivered by trained and supervised speech pathology clinicians using operationalised manuals. Treatment will be administered in 1-hour sessions, 4 times per week for 3 weeks. The primary outcomes are speech sound and prosodic accuracy on a customised 292 item probe and the Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation and Phonology inconsistency subtest administered prior to treatment and 1 week, 1 month and 4 months post-treatment. All post assessments will be completed by blinded assessors. Our hypotheses are: 1) treatment effects at 1 week post will be similar for both treatments, 2) maintenance of treatment effects at 1 and 4 months post will be greater for Rapid Syllable Transition Treatment than Nuffield Dyspraxia Programme treatment, and 3) generalisation of treatment effects to untrained related speech behaviours will be greater for Rapid Syllable Transition Treatment than Nuffield Dyspraxia Programme treatment. This protocol was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee, University of Sydney (#12924). DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomised control trial to test treatment for CAS. It will be valuable for clinical decision-making and providing evidence-based services for children with CAS.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12612000744853.

Indexed as

Analysis of VarianceApraxiasChildChild, PreschoolClinical ProtocolsHumansSpeech DisordersSpeech TherapyTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22863021
PMCPMC3441276
OpenAlexW2053078061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.