ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2018
Do Participants Report Any Undesired Effects in Ultrasound Speech Therapy?
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Correcting Residual Errors With Spectral, Ultrasound, and Traditional Speech Therapy: Delineation of Sensorimotor Subtypes
Correcting Residual Errors With Spectral, Ultrasound, and Traditional Speech Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Visual-acoustic Intervention With Service Delivery In-person and Via Telepractice (VISIT) Non-Inferiority Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A mixed-methods pilot randomized control trial of ultrasound visual biofeedback versus standard intervention for children with cleft palate ± cleft lip: Parents' and children's perspectives.International journal of language & communication disordersTrial
- A Qualitative Analysis of Clinician Perspectives of Ultrasound Biofeedback for Speech Sound Disorders.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Ultrasound visual feedback of the tongue is increasingly used as a component of speech therapy in clinical research and practice. The purpose is to offer a preliminary summary of the nature of participant-reported undesired effects related to ultrasound visual feedback. Method: Sixty-two participants across 3 sites (mean age = 11.9 years) and 38 parents responded to a 2-item verbal questionnaire following 14-16 hr of treatment regarding any aspects of the treatment they did not like. Responses were thematically categorized. Results: The 62 participants provided 65 distinct responses, which were categorized as follows: 31% no concerns, 40% gel-related (e.g., cold, sticky), 21% positioning of the probe (e.g., uncomfortable, annoying), 3% chin hurting (qualified as being minor in nature), and 5% other (i.e., unrelated to the use of the ultrasound). Responses from all parents suggested no concerns about the use of ultrasound; however, 8% expressed concerns unrelated to ultrasound use (e.g., fatigue). Conclusion: These data inform clinicians and researchers about participant's experience and highlight the type of comments most likely to be encountered with ultrasound in speech therapy. Although the reported adverse effects can be considered minor, they should be weighed against the potential benefits of visual feedback in treatment.
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.