ArticlePerspectives of the ASHA special interest groups2020
Differences Between School-Aged Children with Apraxia of Speech and Other Speech Sound Disorders on Multisyllable Repetition.
Article in Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups, 2020. 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.
- Speech Error Subtypes and Their Association With Phonological Awareness in School-Aged Children and Young Adults.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- Reliability of Lexical Stress Transcription in Childhood Apraxia of Speech.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2026Article
- Perceptual Ratings Predict Speech Inversion Articulatory Kinematics in Childhood Speech Sound Disorders.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- An End-to-End Overview of Clinical Speech AI.IEEE transactions on audio, speech, and language processing (2025) · 2026Article
- Concurrent Validity Between Two Sound Sequencing Tasks Used to Identify Childhood Apraxia of Speech in School-Age Children.American journal of speech-language pathology · 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
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate whether features of childhood apraxia of speech identified in previous literature could be replicated in a sample of school-age children.
methodA literature review was conducted to identify candidate speech features that have been previously considered when differentiating childhood apraxia of speech from other types of speech sound disorders. The candidate features recoverable from blinded transcriptions of multisyllable word repetitions (MSWR) were applied to a cohort of 61 children, aged 7-17, previously classified as having childhood apraxia of speech (n=21) or non-CAS Speech Sound Disorder (SSD, n=40).
resultsOne hundred and ninety-four features had been explored in previous literature to assess their ability to differentiate CAS from other SSDs. Fifteen perceptual features were selected from this list to be applied to performance on the MSWR. In this sample, children with CAS differed from children with SSD on the prevalence of voicing changes, percent of structurally correct words, correct lexical stress, and syllable deletions within a speech corpus derived from the MSWR task.
conclusionAlthough previous literature points to numerous features as differentiating CAS from other SSDs, only a portion of those features were replicated in this sample of school-age children. Features of CAS that affect segmental accuracy, prosody and word structure may be likely to persist into late childhood and early adolescence.
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.