Trial reportPloS one2015
Direct versus Indirect Treatment for Preschool Children who Stutter: The RESTART Randomized Trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 175 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-pharmacological interventions for stuttering in children six years and younger.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Speech-Language Pathologists' Perceptions of Their Competence in Managing Stuttering: A Systematic Review with Narrative Synthesis.International journal of language & communication disordersPooled it
- Interdisciplinary collaboration and clinical management for Norwegian preschool children who stutter: 'Who, what, when, and where?'Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- De novo protein-coding gene variants in developmental stuttering.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Article
- Influence of Marital and Parental Status on Public Reactions to Stuttering in Chile: A Socio-Demographic Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Executive function in preschool children who stutter: a behavioral assessment study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Stuttering: Our Current Knowledge, Research Opportunities, and Ways to Address Critical Gaps.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Review
- Article
- Lidcombe Program translation to community clinics in Australia and England.International journal of language & communication disorders · 2023Article
- Article
- Validation of the Vanderbilt Responses to Your Child's Speech Rating Scale for Parents of Young Children Who Stutter.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2022Article
- Risk Factors for the Development of Persistent Stuttering: What Every Pediatrician Should Know.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Disfluency Characteristics of 4- and 5-Year-Old Children Who Stutter and Their Relationship to Stuttering Persistence and Recovery.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2020Article
- The Pharmacologic Treatment of Stuttering and Its Neuropharmacologic Basis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Review
- Article
- The Effects of Syntactic Complexity and Sentence Length on the Speech Motor Control of School-Age Children Who Stutter.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2018Article
- Selecting Treatments and Monitoring Outcomes: The Circle of Evidence-Based Practice and Client-Centered Care in Treating a Preschool Child Who Stutters.Language, speech, and hearing services in schools · 2018Article
- The Pathogenesis, Assessment and Treatment of Speech Fluency Disorders.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017Article
- Management options for pediatric patients who stutter: current challenges and future directions.Pediatric health, medicine and therapeutics · 2016Review
- Understanding the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering Can Improve Stuttering Therapy.Topics in language disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveStuttering is a common childhood disorder. There is limited high quality evidence regarding options for best treatment. The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of direct treatment with indirect treatment in preschool children who stutter.
methodsIn this multicenter randomized controlled trial with an 18 month follow-up, preschool children who stutter who were referred for treatment were randomized to direct treatment (Lidcombe Program; n = 99) or indirect treatment (RESTART-DCM treatment; n = 100). Main inclusion criteria were age 3-6 years, ≥3% syllables stuttered (%SS), and time since onset ≥6 months. The primary outcome was the percentage of non-stuttering children at 18 months. Secondary outcomes included stuttering frequency (%SS), stuttering severity ratings by the parents and therapist, severity rating by the child, health-related quality of life, emotional and behavioral problems, and speech attitude.
resultsPercentage of non-stuttering children for direct treatment was 76.5% (65/85) versus 71.4% (65/91) for indirect treatment (Odds Ratio (OR), 0.6; 95% CI, 0.1-2.4, p = .42). At 3 months, children treated by direct treatment showed a greater decline in %SS (significant interaction time x therapy: β = -1.89; t(282.82) = -2.807, p = .005). At 18 months, stuttering frequency was 1.2% (SD 2.1) for direct treatment and 1.5% (SD 2.1) for indirect treatment. Direct treatment had slightly better scores on most other secondary outcome measures, but no differences between treatment approaches were significant.
conclusionsDirect treatment decreased stuttering more quickly during the first three months of treatment. At 18 months, however, clinical outcomes for direct and indirect treatment were comparable. These results imply that at 18 months post treatment onset, both treatments are roughly equal in treating developmental stuttering in ways that surpass expectations of natural recovery. Follow-up data are needed to confirm these findings in the longer term.
trial registrationisrctn.org ISRCTN24362190.
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.