ArticleThe Laryngoscope2026
Primary Language Spoken at Home and Speech Outcomes Among Children With Cleft Palate.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2026. 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.
- Primary Language Spoken at Home and Speech Outcomes Among Children With Cleft Palate.The Laryngoscope · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesFollowing cleft palate repair, early detection of maladaptive compensatory mechanisms and hypernasality may determine the need for additional intervention. Our goal is to understand if primary language influences rates of subsequent intervention among children with cleft palate in the United States.
methodsWithin a single urban cleft team, patients with a history of palate repair evaluated at least 2 years postoperatively were analyzed using Fisher's exact test.
resultsThere were 124 patients representing 6 languages: 101 English, 9 Spanish, and 14 other (Vietnamese, Haitian Creole, Portuguese, and Tamil). Some patients were repaired elsewhere and presented to our clinic secondarily for evaluation. Among English and non-English speaking children, similar rates of symptomatic and asymptomatic postoperative fistula (17.8% vs. 17.4%, p = 1.00), hypernasality and/or audible nasal emissions (ANEs) (44.6% vs. 30.4%, p = 0.25), persistent hypernasality/ANE after speech therapy (ST) (22.8% vs. 13.0%, p = 0.40), and revision surgery (33.7% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.14) were observed. However, higher rates of hypernasality/ANE (45.5% vs. 14.3%, p = 0.04), persistent hypernasality/ANE after ST (23.6% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.04), and revision surgery (33.6% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.06) were noted among English and Spanish speakers. [Correction added on 08 May 2026, after first online publication: The preceding sentence has been revised in this version.]
conclusionWithin a single urban practice in the United States, lower rates of hypernasality and revision surgery were observed among non-English and non-Spanish speaking patients. Such findings may suggest disparities in resources available for detecting speech abnormalities in this population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.