ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2022
Estimating Early Language Input in Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children With the Language Access Profile Tool.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Language and Cognitive Development in Bimodal Bilingual Deaf Children in Hearing Families: Three Case Studies.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Early Production of Imperceptible Words by Infants and Toddlers Born Deaf or Blind.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to describe the Language Access Profile Tool (LAPT) and its psychometric properties with the aim of evaluating its suitability as an alternative to the deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) Language Exposure Assessment Tool (D-LEAT) in clinical practice with DHH children age 12 years and younger.
methodWe administered both the LAPT and D-LEAT to the caregivers of 105 DHH children 12 years old and younger from across the United States, 40% of whom were interviewed again after a delay of at least 1 month. Each interview resulted in a child-specific estimate of their cumulative experience with language input, expressed as a proportion divided across eight categories.
resultsParticipants in the sample reported experience with all eight input categories, but four categories were common and four were rare. Estimates for all input categories were consistent at both initial and follow-up interviews. Estimates for each input category were also strongly correlated with the corresponding estimates from the D-LEAT, although correlations for the rare categories should be interpreted cautiously.
conclusionsThe LAPT demonstrates sufficient test-retest reliability and convergent validity to be a useful and more user-friendly alternative to the D-LEAT. We provide recommendations for how the LAPT and the D-LEAT can be best used in their current form. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20669001.
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.