ArticleInternational journal of language & communication disorders2016
Addressing phonological memory in language therapy with clients who have Down syndrome: Perspectives of speech-language pathologists.
Article in International journal of language & communication disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Distributional Cues to Language Learning in Children With Intellectual Disabilities.Language, speech, and hearing services in schools · 2018Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPhonological memory (PM) plays a significant role in language development but is impaired in individuals with Down syndrome (DS). Without formal recommendations on how to address PM limitations in clients with DS, it is possible speech-language pathologists (SLPs) find ways to do so in their practices.
aimsThis study asked if and how SLPs address PM in language therapy with clients who have DS. It also asked about SLPs' opinions of the importance, practicality and difficulty of addressing PM in clients with DS. METHODS & PROCEDURES: SLPs participated in an online survey that asked if they address PM in clients with DS and, if so, how often and with which techniques. The survey also asked SLPs to rate their opinions of addressing PM in clients with DS with Likert scales. To contrast clients with DS, SLPs were asked about their practices and opinions with clients who have specific language impairment (SLI) and autism spectrum disorders (ASD). SLPs were recruited through e-mails sent from state organizations and researchers. To compare SLPs' practices and opinions across client types, frequency analyses and analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were run. OUTCOMES &
resultsIn all, 290 SLPs from 28 states completed the survey. Nearly all SLPs were currently practising at the time data were collected, and all worked with at least one of the three client types. Findings indicated SLPs less often addressed PM and used less variety when addressing PM with clients who have DS compared with clients who have SLI or ASD. Further, SLPs considered it less important, less practical and more difficult to address PM in clients who have DS when compared with clients who have SLI, whereas a similar pattern was found with clients who have ASD. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: SLPs' opinions could be one reason they under-address PM with clients who have DS. Other reasons include there are no evidence-based practice (EBP) guidelines on this topic, and there is not enough familiarity with the DS phenotype among SLPs. Future research on ways to address PM in clients with DS successfully are essential so that EBP guidelines can be established and language therapy can be made more effective.
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.