Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27625603›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2016

Intensive Treatment with Ultrasound Visual Feedback for Speech Sound Errors in Childhood Apraxia.

Jonathan L Preston, Megan C Leece, Edwin Maas

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03238677 (Treating Childhood Apraxia of Speech), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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.

NCT03238677 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Treating Childhood Apraxia of Speech: Role of Biofeedback & Practice Distribution

TypeinterventionalSponsorSyracuse UniversityRan2017 to 2022Enrolled56ConditionsChildhood Apraxia of SpeechArmsSpeech Motor Chaining without Biofeedback, Biofeedback, Distributed Practice, Massed --> Distributed Practice
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Interventions for childhood apraxia of speech.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Reproducible Speech Research With the Artificial Intelligence-Ready PERCEPT Corpora.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Computer-assisted challenge point intervention for residual speech errors.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2021
    Article
  14. Effects of Practice Variability on Second-Language Speech Production Training.Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP) · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Tongue Part Movement Trajectories for /r/ Using Ultrasound.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2019
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Jonathan L PrestonDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Syracuse UniversitySyracuse, NY, USA; Haskins LaboratoriesNew Haven, CT, USA.
Megan C LeeceDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Syracuse University Syracuse, NY, USA.
Edwin MaasDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Temple University Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

Ultrasound Biofeedback for Therapy-Resistant Speech Sound Disorders in ChildrenR03DC013152 · NIDCD · SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY · PI PRESTON, JONATHAN · 2013 to 2015
$497k
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ultrasound imaging is an adjunct to traditional speech therapy that has shown to be beneficial in the remediation of speech sound errors. Ultrasound biofeedback can be utilized during therapy to provide clients with additional knowledge about their tongue shapes when attempting to produce sounds that are erroneous. The additional feedback may assist children with childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) in stabilizing motor patterns, thereby facilitating more consistent and accurate productions of sounds and syllables. However, due to its specialized nature, ultrasound visual feedback is a technology that is not widely available to clients. Short-term intensive treatment programs are one option that can be utilized to expand access to ultrasound biofeedback. Schema-based motor learning theory suggests that short-term intensive treatment programs (massed practice) may assist children in acquiring more accurate motor patterns. In this case series, three participants ages 10-14 years diagnosed with CAS attended 16 h of speech therapy over a 2-week period to address residual speech sound errors. Two participants had distortions on rhotic sounds, while the third participant demonstrated lateralization of sibilant sounds. During therapy, cues were provided to assist participants in obtaining a tongue shape that facilitated a correct production of the erred sound. Additional practice without ultrasound was also included. Results suggested that all participants showed signs of acquisition of sounds in error. Generalization and retention results were mixed. One participant showed generalization and retention of sounds that were treated; one showed generalization but limited retention; and the third showed no evidence of generalization or retention. Individual characteristics that may facilitate generalization are discussed. Short-term intensive treatment programs using ultrasound biofeedback may result in the acquisition of more accurate motor patterns and improved articulation of sounds previously in error, with varying levels of generalization and retention.

Indexed as

childhood apraxia of speechintensive treatment programspeech therapyultrasoundvisual feedback

Identifiers

PMID27625603
PMCPMC5003919

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.