Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25698997›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015

Children with speech sound disorder: comparing a non-linguistic auditory approach with a phonological intervention approach to improve phonological skills.

Cristina F B Murphy, Luciana O Pagan-Neves, Haydée F Wertzner, Eliane Schochat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Cristina F B MurphyDepartment of Physical Therapy, Speech-Language Pathology and Occupational Therapy, Center for Teaching and Research, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo São Paulo, Brazil.
Luciana O Pagan-NevesDepartment of Physical Therapy, Speech-Language Pathology and Occupational Therapy, Center for Teaching and Research, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo São Paulo, Brazil.
Haydée F WertznerDepartment of Physical Therapy, Speech-Language Pathology and Occupational Therapy, Center for Teaching and Research, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo São Paulo, Brazil.
Eliane SchochatDepartment of Physical Therapy, Speech-Language Pathology and Occupational Therapy, Center for Teaching and Research, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the effects of a non-linguistic auditory intervention approach with a phonological intervention approach on the phonological skills of children with speech sound disorder (SSD). A total of 17 children, aged 7-12 years, with SSD were randomly allocated to either the non-linguistic auditory temporal intervention group (n = 10, average age 7.7 ± 1.2) or phonological intervention group (n = 7, average age 8.6 ± 1.2). The intervention outcomes included auditory-sensory measures (auditory temporal processing skills) and cognitive measures (attention, short-term memory, speech production, and phonological awareness skills). The auditory approach focused on non-linguistic auditory training (e.g., backward masking and frequency discrimination), whereas the phonological approach focused on speech sound training (e.g., phonological organization and awareness). Both interventions consisted of 12 45-min sessions delivered twice per week, for a total of 9 h. Intra-group analysis demonstrated that the auditory intervention group showed significant gains in both auditory and cognitive measures, whereas no significant gain was observed in the phonological intervention group. No significant improvement on phonological skills was observed in any of the groups. Inter-group analysis demonstrated significant differences between the improvement following training for both groups, with a more pronounced gain for the non-linguistic auditory temporal intervention in one of the visual attention measures and both auditory measures. Therefore, both analyses suggest that although the non-linguistic auditory intervention approach appeared to be the most effective intervention approach, it was not sufficient to promote the enhancement of phonological skills.

Indexed as

auditory stimulationchildrenlanguage therapyphonology impairmentspeech sound disorder

Identifiers

PMID25698997
PMCPMC4316717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.