ReviewFrontiers in psychology2023
Stuttering in individuals with Down syndrome: a systematic review of earlier research.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Language and Ageing in Adults With Down Syndrome: An Analysis of Receptive and Expressive Language Measures.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The main objective of this systematic review was to synthesize the evidence on the occurrence and characteristics of stuttering in individuals with Down syndrome and thus contribute knowledge about stuttering in this population. Group studies reporting outcome measures of stuttering were included. Studies with participants who were preselected based on their fluency status were excluded. We searched the Eric, PsychInfo, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases on 3rd January 2022 and conducted supplementary searches of the reference lists of previous reviews and the studies included in the current review, as well as relevant speech and language journals. The included studies were coded in terms of information concerning sample characteristics, measurement approaches, and stuttering-related outcomes. The appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies (AXIS) was used to evaluate study quality. We identified 14 eligible studies, with a total of 1,833 participants (mean = 131.29, standard deviation = 227.85, median = 45.5) between 3 and 58 years of age. The estimated occurrence of stuttering ranged from 2.38 to 56%, which is substantially higher than the estimated prevalence (1%) of stuttering in the general population. The results also showed that stuttering severity most often was judged to be mild-to-moderate and that individuals with Down syndrome displayed secondary behaviors when these were measured. However, little attention has been paid to investigating the potential adverse effects of stuttering for individuals with Down syndrome. We judged the quality of the evidence to be moderate-to-low. The negative evaluation was mostly due to sampling limitations that decreased the representability and generalizability of the results. Based on the high occurrence of stuttering and the potential negative effects of this condition, individuals with Down syndrome who show signs of stuttering should be referred to a speech and language pathologist for an evaluation of their need for stuttering treatment.
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.