ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2019
Pediatric Speech-Language Pathologists' Use of Mobile Health Technology: Qualitative Questionnaire Study.
Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rehabilitation clinicians' use of mainstream wireless technologies in practice: a scoping review.Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology · 2024Article
- The willingness and attitudes of speech-language pathologists towards the use of mobile health technology: a survey study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Digital Health and Learning in Speech-Language Pathology, Phoniatrics, and Otolaryngology: Survey Study for Designing a Digital Learning Toolbox App.JMIR medical education · 2022Article
- Digital Health and Digital Learning Experiences Across Speech-Language Pathology, Phoniatrics, and Otolaryngology: Interdisciplinary Survey Study.JMIR medical education · 2021Article
- Digital Learning in Speech-Language Pathology, Phoniatrics, and Otolaryngology: Interdisciplinary and Exploratory Analysis of Content, Organizing Structures, and Formats.JMIR medical education · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile technology use in pediatric therapies is increasing, there is so far no research available focusing on how pediatric speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in the United States use technology.
objectiveThis paper sought to determine if, and to what extent, pediatric SLPs are using mobile apps, to determine what purpose they are using them for, and to identify gaps in available technology to provide guidance for future technological development.
methodsPediatric SLPs completed an online survey containing five sections: demographics, overall use, use in assessment, use in intervention, barriers, and future directions.
resultsMobile app use by 485 pediatric SLPs in the clinical setting was analyzed. Most (364/438; 83.1%) pediatric SLPs reported using technology ≤50% of the time in their clinical work, with no differences evident by age group (<35 years and ≥35 years; P=.97). Pediatric SLPs are currently using apps for intervention (399/1105; 36.1%), clinical information (241/1105; 21.8%), parent education (151/1105; 13.7%), assessment (132/1105; 12%), client education (108/1105; 9.8%), and other uses (55/1105; 5.0%). Cost (46/135; 34.1%) and lack of an evidence base (36/135; 26.7%) were the most frequently reported barriers. Most SLPs (268/380; 70.7%) desired more technology use, with no difference evident by age group (P=.81).
conclusionsA majority of pediatric SLPs are using mobile apps less than 50% of the time in a pediatric setting and they use them more during intervention compared to assessment. While pediatric SLPs are hesitant to add to their client's screen time, they would like more apps to be developed that are supported by research and are less expensive. Implications for future research and app development are also discussed.
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.