ArticleLanguage, speech, and hearing services in schools2025
Speech-Language Pathologists' Perspectives on Language Assessment in Bilingual Children.
Article in Language, speech, and hearing services in schools, 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.
- Language History Collection in Multilingual Clinical Practice: A Qualitative Analysis of Public-Sector Clinical Perspectives.International journal of language & 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study used a semistructured open interview approach to gather information from school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) regarding their assessment practices for bilingual children with suspected language disorders.
methodPhone interviews were conducted with 25 school-based SLPs across the United States. The interviews explored assessment topics related to tool selection and rationale and the integration of assessment data to determine diagnosis and treatment eligibility.
resultsThe results of this study suggest that SLPs use a combination of norm-referenced and informal assessments when evaluating bilingual children. Informal measures, such as parent/teacher interviews and language sampling, were relied upon for diagnostic decisions, contrasting with the emphasis on norm-referenced testing observed in previous research. District policies and guidelines influenced norm-referenced assessments. Informal tools were used to capture natural language use, provide a comprehensive view of bilingual abilities, and gather detailed case histories.
conclusionsSchool-based SLPs integrate norm-referenced and informal measures in their bilingual assessment practices, with a notable reliance on informal assessments for diagnostic decision making. This approach contrasts with the reliance on norm-referenced measures typically observed in monolingual assessment practices, reflecting SLPs' potential recognition of limitations and biases in norm-referenced tests when used with bilingual children. The findings suggest that SLPs are aware of and use culturally sensitive diagnostic practices.
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.