ArticleInternational journal of language & communication disorders
Speech and Language Therapists' Views Regarding Their Scope of Practice in Written Language.
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. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpoken and written language are closely linked, and Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs) have expertise in the language skills that support both. However, unlike countries such as the US and Australia, UK SLTs lack clear guidance on their role in written language. This study explores the views of SLTs working with adults (aged 16+) and children to inform consideration of a UK position statement.
aimsTo examine UK SLTs' views on their role and scope of practice in written language assessment and intervention, and to ascertain whether a position statement is needed. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: In 2021, an online survey was completed by 511 SLTs across the UK. The survey explored SLTs' views on their role in written language, alongside their reported involvement in direct and indirect written language assessment and intervention. Quantitative data was analysed using R (R Core Team, 2024). OUTCOMES AND
resultsSLTs working with adults or across adults and children are more likely than those working solely with children to report having knowledge, skills, and a role in written language. Those already working in this area held a more positive view of their role. Most UK SLT respondents (89%) supported the development of a UK position statement. There was also strong support for greater emphasis on the links between language and literacy in university training. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: SLTs working across the lifespan are more likely to engage in written language than those working only with children. Findings indicate a clear need for UK specific guidance on SLTs' role in written language. Addressing this will require enhanced pre-registration education and continuing professional development on the links between language and literacy. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Language is the foundation for reading (word reading and reading comprehension) and underpins spelling and writing skills. SLT training covers areas of language that are important for literacy development. Internationally, SLTs in countries such as the USA and Australia have clearer guidance and more established roles in supporting written language and literacy, whereas in the UK this guidance remains limited. What does this study add to existing knowledge The paper enhances our understanding of UK SLTs' views on their role in written language across the lifespan. It highlights differing views across those who work with adults and those who work with children, and their scope of practice within written language. The level of certainty around SLTs' role is influenced by whether they work on written language, resource allocation, and/or training. What are the potential clinical implications of this work? Key clinical implications include: greater clarity regarding the role and scope of practice of UK SLTs with written language across the lifespan; UK policy and guidance through, for example, a formal position statement; research into how current training institutions embed the links between language and literacy within their curricula; enhanced pre-registration training and continuing professional development opportunities for practising clinicians; and a strategic approach to supporting therapists working with children through interprofessional education and education-based placements.
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.