ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Cognitive flexibility in younger and older children who stutter.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Meta-Analytical Review of Executive Function Skills in Adults Who Stutter.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Pooled it
- Unraveling the mystery of stuttering: clinical and physiological insights into its manifestation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Executive function in preschool children who stutter: a behavioral assessment study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Stuttering: Our Current Knowledge, Research Opportunities, and Ways to Address Critical Gaps.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Review
- Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Recent research findings suggest possible weaknesses in cognitive flexibility ( Methods: Participants were 37 CWS (mean age = 6.90 years) and 37 age-and gender-matched CWNS (mean age = 6.88 years), divided in a younger (below 7 years) and older (above 7 years) age group. All participants undertook a computerized visual set-shifting task consisting of three blocks. Results: All participants showed expected mixing-and set-shifting-costs. Only the within-block analyses yielded significant between (sub)group differences. Investigation of the block × classification group × age group interactions showed that older CWS had larger set-shifting-costs (slowed down more and made more errors) compared to older CWNS. Conclusion: While all participants required more time during set-shifting trials, only the older CWS (7-10 years old), and not younger CWS, were slower and made more errors. This finding corroborates previous findings in CWS of a similar age and could possibly point to a role of
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.