ArticleCoDAS2025
Efficacy of the Adapted Cycles Intervention Program (PROCICLOS-A) and the influence of severity on the performance of children with Speech Sound Disorders.
Article in CoDAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo verify the efficacy of PROCICLOS-A in children with SSD, according to the weekly frequency of sessions, and the severity's influence on the sessions' performance.
methodsEight children with SSD participated, both sexes, ages between 5:03 and 7:07 years, divided into two groups: C1, once a week; C2, twice a week. The efficacy of PROCICLOS-A was verified in C1 and C2 by analyzing variables from the phonology tests of the ABFW assessment across three evaluation moments. The performance in the sessions was obtained through scoring the activities.
resultsAll measures significantly differed, indicating improved performance in the evaluations after the intervention. Regarding the influence of the frequency of the sessions, there was no significant difference between C1 and C2 in the three evaluation moments. Blocks of sessions analyzed the performance in the sessions: A (sessions 1, 4, 7, 10), B (sessions 2, 5, 8, 11), C (sessions 3, 6, 9, 12). The analysis revealed lower performance during the sessions of Block A, while Blocks B and C demonstrated better performance.
conclusionThe study provided evidence for the efficacy of PROCICLOS-A, regardless of the dosage and frequency of sessions. It suggests that maintaining the cumulative intensity of the intervention is vital, indicating that the total number of intervention hours may have a greater impact than the number of sessions held per week. There was an improvement in each child's performance throughout the program, regardless of the target sound and severity at the beginning of the intervention.
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.