Trial reportJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2020
A Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating Online Training for Prelinguistic Communication.
Trial report in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose This study explored the utility of online training as a platform for teaching early intervention speech-language pathologists to recognize potentially communicative, prelinguistic behaviors in young children with physical disabilities and complex communication needs. Method Using a randomized controlled trial, 45 early intervention speech-language pathologists were randomly assigned to one of three conditions within an online training: practice with implicit problem-solving (identification condition), practice with explicit problem-solving (reflection condition), or no practice (control condition). Knowledge about early communication, skill at recognizing prelinguistic behaviors, time taken to complete the training, and perceptions of the training experience were examined. Results Participants in the no-practice control condition took significantly less time to complete the training, achieved the same positive outcomes on the knowledge and skill assessments, and rated the training as appealing as compared with participants assigned to the more time-intensive identification and reflection practice conditions. Conclusions Results suggest the importance of considering efficiency and appeal when designing successful trainings for moving evidence into practice.
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.