Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32383829›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of language & communication disorders2020

Collaboration between parents and SLTs produces optimal outcomes for children attending speech and language therapy: Gathering the evidence.

Inge S Klatte, Rena Lyons, Karen Davies, Sam Harding, Julie Marshall, Cristina McKean, Sue Roulstone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of language & communication disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Awareness of audiology and speech-language pathology services among healthcare professionals in Saudi Arabia.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors.

Inge S KlatteHU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7280-8960
Rena LyonsDiscipline of Speech and Language Therapy, School of Health Sciences, College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, National University of Ireland (NUI), Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-7294-9707
Karen DaviesNIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8983-8357
Sam HardingBristol Speech & Language Therapy Research Unit, North Bristol NHS Trust, Southmead Hospital Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5870-2094
Julie MarshallHealth Professions Department, Manchester Metropolitan University, Birley Fields Campus, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8860-2951
Cristina McKeanSchool of Education, Communication & Language Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9058-9813
Sue RoulstoneBristol Speech & Language Therapy Research Unit, North Bristol NHS Trust, Southmead Hospital Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9052-1330

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCollaboration between parents and speech and language therapists (SLTs) is seen as a key element in family-centred models. Collaboration can have positive impacts on parental and children's outcomes. However, collaborative practice has not been well described and researched in speech and language therapy for children and may not be easy to achieve. It is important that we gain a deeper understanding of collaborative practice with parents, how it can be achieved and how it can impact on outcomes. This understanding could support practitioners in daily practice with regard to achieving collaborative practice with parents in different contexts.

aimsTo set a research agenda on collaborative practice between parents and SLTs in order to generate evidence regarding what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A realist evaluation approach was used to make explicit what collaborative practice with parents entails. The steps suggested by the RAMESES II project were used to draft a preliminary programme theory about collaborative practice between parents and SLTs. This process generates explicit hypotheses which form a potential research agenda. DISCUSSION &

conclusionsA preliminary programme theory of collaborative practice with parents was drafted using a realist approach. Potential contextual factors (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O) were presented which could be configured into causal mechanisms to help explain what works for whom in what circumstances. CMO configurations were drafted, based on the relevant literature, which serve as exemplars to illustrate how this methodology could be used. In order to debate, test and expand our hypothesized programme theory for collaborative practice with parents, further testing against a broader literature is required alongside research to explore the functionality of the configurations across contexts. This paper highlights the importance of further research on collaborative practice with parents and the potential value of realist evaluation methodology. What this paper adds Current policy in education, health and social care advocates for family-centred care and collaborative practice with parents. Thereby, collaborative practice is the preferred practice for SLTs and parents. In this paper, we explore collaborative practice and use a realist evaluation approach to achieve the aim of setting a research agenda in this area. Researchers use realist evaluation, a methodology originally developed by Pawson and Tilley in the 1990s, to explore the causal link between interventions and outcomes, summarized as what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent. Realist evaluation provides a framework to explore configurations between contexts (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O). We used this methodology to take a first step at making explicit what collaborative practice is and how it might be achieved in different contexts. We did this by drafting a preliminary programme theory about collaborative practice, where we made explicit what context factors and mechanisms might influence outcomes in collaborative practice between parents and SLTs. Based on this programme theory, we argue for the need to develop a research agenda on collaborative practice with parents of children with speech, language and communication needs. The steps between a programme theory and a research agenda could entail exploring each CMO, or step in the programme theory, and evaluating it against the existing literature-both within and beyond speech and language therapy-to see how far it stands up. In this way, gaps could be identified that could be converted into research questions that would stimulate debate about a research agenda on collaborative practice. Understanding how collaborative practice can be achieved in different contexts could support SLTs to use mechanisms to optimise collaborative practice intentionally and tailor interventions to the specific needs of families, thereby enhancing collaborative practice between parents and SLTs.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHumansLanguage Development DisordersMaleParentsProgram EvaluationQualitative ResearchSpeech-Language Pathologycollaborative practiceparentsrealist evaluationspeech and language therapy

Identifiers

PMID32383829
PMCPMC7383473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.