ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2022
Dynamic Norming for Systematic Analysis of Language Transcripts.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The development of a digital story-retell elicitation and analysis tool through citizen science data collection, software development and machine learning.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Dynamic Norming and Open Science.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2022Article
- Mother-child communication and maternal depressive symptoms in families of children with cancer: integrating macro and micro levels of analysis.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis exploratory study sought to establish the psychometric stability of a dynamic norming system using the Systematic Analysis of Language Transcripts (SALT) databases. Dynamic norming is the process by which clinicians select a subset of the normative database sample matched to their individual client's demographic characteristics.
methodThe English Conversation and Student-Selected Story (SSS) Narrative databases from SALT were used to conduct the analyses in two phases. Phase 1 was an exploratory examination of the standard error of measure (SEM) of six clinically relevant transcript metrics at predetermined sampling intervals to determine (a) whether the dynamic norming process resulted in samples with adequate stability and (b) the minimum sample size required for stable results. Phase 2 was confirmatory, as random samples were taken from the SALT databases to simulate clinical comparison samples. These samples were examined (a) for stability of SEM estimations and (b) to confirm the sample size findings from Phase 1.
resultsResults of Phase 1 indicated that the SEMs for the six transcript metrics across both databases were low relative to each metric's scale. Samples as small as 40-50 children in the Conversation database and 20-30 children in the SSS Narrative database resulted in stable SEM estimations. Phase 2 confirmed these findings, indicating that age bands as small as ±4 months from a given center-point resulted in stable estimations provided there were approximately 35 children or more in the comparison sample.
conclusionPsychometrically stable comparison samples can be achieved using SALT's dynamic norming system that are much smaller than the standard sample size recommended in most tests of children's language.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34890246What 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.