ArticlePerspectives of the ASHA special interest groups2024
Diversity of Research Participant Gender, Race, and Ethnicity in Communication Sciences and Disorders: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Synthesis of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Publications in 2020.
Article in Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The use of Language ENvironment Analysis in autism research: A systematic review.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2025Pooled it
- A year in stuttering research: A systematic review of global representation and sociodemographic reporting practices in English-language journals in 2020.Journal of communication disordersPooled it
- Differences in Narrative Discourse Ability in Traumatic Brain Injury and a Neurotypical Comparison Group: Influence of Age, Education, and Sex.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Article
- Considerations for Measuring Caregiver Talk in Interactions With Infants at Elevated and Population-Level Likelihood for Autism: Deriving Stable Estimates.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2025Article
- Introduction to the Research Symposium on Bilingualism Forum.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023Article
- A Comparison of Listening Skills of Autistic and Non-Autistic Youth While Using and Not Using Remote Microphone Systems.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023Article
- Enhancing online speech and language assessment: Item development for the remote adult language experiment (ReAL-E) tool.Journal of communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: One manifestation of systemic inequities in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) is the chronic underreporting and underrepresentation of sex, gender, race, and ethnicity in research. The present study characterized recent demographic reporting practices and representation of participants across CSD research. Methods: We systematically reviewed and extracted key reporting and participant data from empirical studies conducted in the United States (US) with human participants published in the year 2020 in journals by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA; Results: Sex or gender was reported in 85.5% of included studies; race was reported in 33.7%; and ethnicity was reported in 13.8%. Sex and gender were clearly differentiated in 3.4% of relevant studies. Where reported, median proportions for race and ethnicity were significantly different from the US population, with underrepresentation noted for all non-White racial groups and Hispanic participants. Moreover, 64.7% of studies that reported sex or gender and 67.2% of studies that reported race or ethnicity did not consider these respective variables in analyses or discussion. Conclusion: At present, research published in ASHA journals frequently fails to report key demographic data summarizing the characteristics of participants. Moreover, apparent gaps in representation of minoritized racial and ethnic groups threaten the external validity of CSD research and broader health care equity endeavors in the US. Although our study is limited to a single year and publisher, our results point to several steps for readers that may bring greater accountability, consistency, and diversity to the discipline.
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.