Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41456947›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of language & communication disorders

Bringing the Computer-Based Instrument for Low Motor Language Testing to Canada: A Survey of Caregiver and Clinician Perspectives.

F Aileen Costigan, Tom Chau, Johanna Geytenbeek, Kristine Stadskleiv, Beata Batorowicz, Sarah Hopmans, Dayle McCauley, Danijela Grahovac, Brenda Agnew, Jodi Friesen and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of language & communication disorders. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

F Aileen CostiganSchool of Communication Sciences & Disorders, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Tom ChauBloorview Research Institute, Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Johanna GeytenbeekDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, CP Expertise Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Kristine StadskleivDepartment of Special Needs Education, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Beata BatorowiczSchool of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Sarah HopmansCanChild Centre for Childhood Onset Disability Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Dayle McCauleyCanChild Centre for Childhood Onset Disability Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Danijela GrahovacCanChild Centre for Childhood Onset Disability Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Brenda AgnewCanChild Centre for Childhood Onset Disability Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Jodi FriesenSchool of Communication Sciences & Disorders, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
B J CunninghamSchool of Communication Sciences & Disorders, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2032-4999

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research Spring2022ProjectGrantPTJ-469750
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate assessment of language comprehension is crucial to positive outcomes for children with cerebral palsy (CP) but is difficult for those with significant speech and physical impairments (SSPI). Standardized tools that typically require these children to speak, vocalize or select directly pose particular challenges.

aimTo describe Canadian caregivers' and clinicians' language comprehension assessment experiences and needs for children with CP and SSPI prior to soliciting feedback to advance the Computer-Based instrument for Low motor Language Testing (C-BiLLT-CAN), a standardized and accessible tool designed specifically for these children. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Recruiting from Canadian children's treatment centres, augmentative and alternative communication clinics, and via social media, we conducted an environmental scan of caregivers of and clinicians providing services to children with CP and SSPI. Surveys designed using the Knowledge to Action Framework solicited both quantitative and qualitative data, summarized using descriptive statistics and inductive content analysis, respectively. OUTCOMES AND

resultsTwenty-two caregivers (21 females, 1 male; mean age = 42 years) and 39 clinicians (36 females, 3 males; mean age = 41 years) from 7 Canadian provinces completed the survey. Most caregivers had experienced language comprehension assessment but were typically only 'somewhat confident' in the results, despite considering accuracy 'very important.' Most clinicians were involved in language comprehension assessment and overwhelmingly relied on non-standardized tools despite feeling at best 'fairly confident' in their results. Qualitative comments indicated the utility of a population-specific test/testing procedures and/or associated normative data to complement non-standardized tools. Participants indicated that the C-BiLLT-CAN could be improved by expanding available response methods and supporting visual and auditory access modifications to promote customization. Anticipated benefits of the C-BiLLT-CAN included improved interaction with, participation for, and understanding of the abilities of children with CP and SSPI; and improved interventions and outcomes for these children and their families. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The C-BiLLT-CAN could fill a critical gap in services available to Canadian children with CP and SSPI. Caregivers and clinicians recognized the benefits of incorporating a reliable and valid standardized tool as part of a comprehensive language comprehension assessment battery for this population but valued additional response methods and features to support access and implementation. Integration of the additional response methods and customization options recommended by end users is expected to further increase the usefulness and feasibility of the C-BiLLT-CAN in the Canadian clinical context. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Accurate assessment of language comprehension is crucial to positive outcomes for children with cerebral palsy (CP), but is especially difficult for those with significant speech and physical impairments (SSPI). Standardized tools that typically require these children to speak, vocalize or select directly pose particular challenges. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This environmental scan describes Canadian caregivers' and clinicians' language comprehension assessment experiences and needs for children with CP and SSPI and solicits feedback to advance the Computer-Based instrument for Low motor Language Testing (C-BiLLT-CAN), a standardized and accessible language comprehension assessment tool designed specifically for these children. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? With the incorporation of an expanded breadth of response methods and customization options, the C-BiLLT-CAN could fill a critical gap in services available to Canadian children with CP and SSPI. Caregivers and clinicians recognize the benefits of incorporating a reliable and valid standardized tool along with commonly used non-standardized techniques as part of a comprehensive language comprehension assessment battery for this population.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCaregiversCerebral PalsyDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedLanguage Development DisordersLanguage TestsAdolescentAdultCanadaChildComprehensionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnairesassessmentaugmentative and alternative communicationcerebral palsyfunctional communicationlanguageparents

Identifiers

PMID41456947
PMCPMC12745186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.