ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2021
Concurrent Validity Between Two Sound Sequencing Tasks Used to Identify Childhood Apraxia of Speech in School-Age Children.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment and Diagnostic Standards of Childhood Apraxia of Speech in Turkish-Speaking Children: A Scoping Review.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To assess the concurrent validity of two tasks used to inform diagnosis of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS), this study evaluated the agreement between the Syllable Repetition Task (SRT) and the Maximum Repetition Rate of Trisyllables (MRR-Tri). Method A retrospective analysis was conducted with 80 children 7-16 years of age who were referred for treatment studies. All children had a speech sound disorder, and all completed both the SRT and the MRR-Tri. On each task, children were classified as meeting or not meeting the tool's threshold for CAS based on the sound sequencing errors demonstrated. Results The two tasks were in agreement for 47 participants (59% of the sample); both tasks classified 13 children as meeting the threshold for CAS and 34 children as not meeting the threshold for CAS. However, the two tasks disagreed on CAS classification for 33 children (41% of the sample). Overall, the MRR-Tri identified more children as having sound sequencing errors indicative of CAS (
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.