Trial reportClinical linguistics & phonetics2013
Grammatical treatment and specific language impairment: neighbourhood density & third person singular -s.
Trial report in Clinical linguistics & phonetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The relationship between language and executive functions in adolescents with Down syndrome and fragile X syndrome.Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders · 2026Article
- Data-Informed Guideposts for Decision Making in Enhanced Conversational Recast Treatment.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2020Article
- Measure What You Treat: Using Language Sample Analysis for Grammatical Outcome Measures in Children with Developmental Language Disorder.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2020Article
- Third person singular -s in typical development and specific language impairment: Input and neighbourhood density.Clinical linguistics & phonetics · 2018Article
- Influences of Phonological Context on Tense Marking in Spanish-English Dual Language Learners.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2017Article
- Dense neighborhoods and mechanisms of learning: evidence from children with phonological delay.Journal of child language · 2015Article
- The interface between neighborhood density and optional infinitives: normal development and Specific Language Impairment.Journal of child language · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to test the effect of manipulating verb neighbourhood density in treatment targeting the third person singular lexical affix. Using a single-subject experimental design, six pre-schoolers with Specific Language Impairment (SLI) were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: (1) treatment with sparse verbs or (2) treatment with dense verbs in 12 sessions. The third person singular lexical affix was targeted for 12 sessions of treatment in both conditions. Treatment gain and generalization were measured as the dependent variables. Third person singular % correct change from pre-treatment to post-treatment was measured using sentence production tasks with comparisons across the two treatment conditions. Treatment gain and generalization were greater for children enrolled in the sparse condition. Preliminary clinical recommendations are made and theoretical implications are discussed relative to neighbourhood density effects on lexical activation and storage in children with SLI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.