ArticleLanguage, speech, and hearing services in schools2022
Concurrent Predictors of Supplementary Sign Use in School-Aged Children With Childhood Apraxia of Speech.
Article in Language, speech, and hearing services in schools, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Case Study of Suspected Childhood Apraxia of Sign.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeManual sign is a common alternative mode of communication taught to children with childhood apraxia of speech (CAS). Gesture use is positively related to later increases in vocabulary and syntactic complexity in typical development, but there is little evidence supporting the use of manual sign for children with CAS. We sought to identify the communicative functions of signs and gestures produced by children with CAS and to identify concurrent factors suggesting which children are more likely to benefit from sign-supported speech intervention.
methodMeasures of receptive and expressive language were gathered from 19 children (ages 3.8-11.1 years) with CAS in a school-based sign-supported speech program. Fourteen of the children produced a total of 145 manual signs, which included both gestures and signs from American Sign Language (
resultsChildren produced 107 complementary manual signs (75.4%) and 38 supplemental (24.6%) manual signs. Of the 38 supplemental signs, 24 (63.2%) provided additional information in the presence of unintelligible or no speech and 14 (36.8%) provided additional information in the presence of intelligible speech. Children's expressive language scores significantly predicted and accounted for 38.4% of the variance in the number of supplemental signs that children used.
conclusionChildren with CAS whose oral expressive language was relatively more impaired produced the most supplementary signs, suggesting that children with oral expressive language challenges are more likely to rely on them for communicating words they cannot yet speak. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21217814.
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.