ArticleCoDAS2026
Risk factors and assessment methods for screening childhood-onset fluency disorders: a scoping review.
Article in CoDAS, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo map the state of the art regarding risk factors and assessment methods employed in the screening of fluency disorders in preschool children. RESEARCH STRATEGIES: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and the PRISMA-ScR checklist. The guiding question was: What are the risk factors and assessment methods used in the screening of fluency disorders (stuttering and cluttering) in preschoolers, as reported in the international literature? The PCC strategy guided the search, using MeSH descriptors and free terms across the Lilacs, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and ScienceDirect databases, from 2020 to 2025, with no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Original full-text articles addressing at least one research question were included. Exclusion criteria comprised non-scientific or secondary publications, studies without abstracts, those outside the conceptual or population scope, and those involving co-occurring disorders. DATA ANALYSIS: Data were analyzed descriptively and synthesized narratively.
resultsA total of 2,091 publications were identified; after duplicate removal and eligibility screening, 11 articles were included. No studies on risk factors for cluttering were found. For stuttering, 14 predictive risk factors were mapped, related to body functions and structures as well as contextual factors. Only two standardized screening tools were identified, both developed in Brazil: the Developmental Stuttering Risk Protocol and the Developmental Stuttering Screening Instrument.
conclusionEvidence on risk factors for cluttering in preschoolers is lacking. For stuttering, biological and contextual factors emerged as key predictors. Most available assessment methods are restricted to use by speech-language pathologists, highlighting gaps and opportunities for future research.
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.