ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2025
Expert Consensus on the Role of Speech-Language Pathologists in Working With Deaf Children Who Use American Sign Language in the United States: A Classical e-Delphi Study.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2025. 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.
- New Zealand deaf adults' perspectives on speech-language therapy for deaf children.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAlthough approximately 40% of school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) regularly serve Deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) students, at present, there are no agreed-upon standards specifying the minimum qualifications and best practices for working with this population, especially those who use signed language. The goal of the present study is to establish expert consensus on recommended clinical training and practice for SLPs working with signing DHH children.
methodExperts in fields related to speech-language pathology and deaf education (
resultsA mixed-method design included qualitative content analysis (Round 1) and quantitative descriptive statistics (Rounds 2 and 3). Experts rated a total of 185 items in Round 2 and 186 items in Round 3. Consensus (at least 70% agreement) was met for 158 statements, with recommendations for SLPs' knowledge, attitudes, and practices. Consensus was not achieved for 28 items, including the level of American Sign Language proficiency required for SLPs.
conclusionsThis study is the first to elicit input from a panel of experts seeking to establish professional standards for SLPs who work with signing DHH children. These findings contribute to the movement toward more inclusive and culturally responsive clinical practice and can inform educational standards and policy for SLPs. Future research is needed to determine whether practicing SLPs meet these recommended standards and how clinical training can support growth for standards that are not currently being met. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.28665218.
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.