The speech-language pathologist\u27s role in supporting the development of self-regulation: A review and tutorial

Purpose Children’s engagement in self-regulation is a strong and positive predictor of their social and academic success, making self-regulation an important focus for caregivers and clinicians. The aims of this article are to provide a framework for understanding self-regulation and to identify strategies speech-language pathologists can use to integrate self-regulation work into their clinical practice. Method Empirically supported considerations describing the developmental progression from co-regulation to self-regulation are outlined, and the effects of stress on self-regulation are discussed. A clinical framework is provided to guide speech-language pathologists in considering stress and self-regulation in their clinical work. Strategies are provided to a) support speech-language pathologists’ employment of co-regulation as a method for mitigating the negative effects that stress can have on therapeutic efforts, and to b) support children’s development of skills (i.e. executive functions, metacognition) required to actively self-regulate. Conclusion Given that children’s ability to attain a state of regulation is integral to attending, engaging, and learning from their environment, the information provided in this tutorial can be used to inform and enhance current clinical practice

Exploring speech and language intervention for preschoolers who are deaf and hard of hearing: A scoping review

Purpose: The objective of this study was to summarize the extant literature on the effectiveness of speech and spoken language interventions for young children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) in order to determine which types of speech-language interventions might be most effective, for which hearing levels and types of hearing losses, and at which dosage. Methods: Using a scoping review methodology, a database search identified 10,360 studies of which 16 met the requirements for inclusion. Data was extracted from each for analysis. Results: Due to the limited number of studies available, high variability in the nature of the studies, and insufficient details about the interventions and sample in many of the papers, fully addressing the study objectives was difficult. However, common themes included the positive effect of caregiver-centered approaches on language outcomes, the equal effectiveness of virtual versus in person intervention, the addition of other speech and language intervention techniques to Auditory-Verbal Therapy may improve outcomes, and the effect of speech and language therapy on auditory skills is unclear. Conclusions: This scoping review offers an initial step in analyzing and implementing evidence-based speech and language treatment protocols for children who are DHH

Exploring Speech and Language Intervention for Preschoolers who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing: A Scoping Review

Purpose: The objective of this study was to summarize the extant literature on the effectiveness of speech and spoken language interventions for young children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) to determine which types of speechlanguage interventions might be most effective, for which hearing levels and types of hearing losses, and at which dosage. Methods: Using a scoping review methodology, a database search identified 10,360 studies of which 16 met the requirements for inclusion. Data was extracted from each for analysis. Results: Due to the limited number of studies available, high variability in the nature of the studies, and insufficient details about the interventions and sample in many of the papers, fully addressing the study objectives was difficult. However, common themes included the positive effect of caregiver-centered approaches on language outcomes, the equal effectiveness of virtual versus in person intervention, the addition of other speech and language intervention techniques to Auditory-Verbal Therapy may improve outcomes, and the effect of speech and language therapy on auditory skills is unclear. Conclusions: This scoping review offers an initial step in analyzing and implementing evidence-based speech and language treatment protocols for children who are DHH. Keywords: Early intervention; auditory-verbal therapy; auditory-oral therapy; scoping review Acronyms: AVT = Auditory-Verbal Therapy; AVTs = auditory-verbal therapists; BAHAs = bone anchored hearing aids; CI = cochlear implant; DHH = deaf or hard of hearing; HA = hearing aid; MLU = mean length utterance; PCIT = Parent-Child Interaction Therapy; SLPs = speech-language pathologists; ToDs = teachers of the deaf Acknowledgements: The authors have no disclosures. This work was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services. The authors would like to thank Marissa Tippet and Joyce Lam for their assistance with this review. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Hillary Ganek, PhD, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Ave., Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada. Email: [email protected]

Testing the accuracy of timing reports in visual timing tasks with a consumer-grade digital camera

© 2016, Psychonomic Society, Inc. This study tested the accuracy of a visual timing task using a readily available and relatively inexpensive consumer grade digital camera. A visual inspection time task was recorded using short high-speed video clips and the timing as reported by the task’s program was compared to the timing as recorded in the video clips. Discrepancies in these two timing reports were investigated further and based on display refresh rate, a decision was made whether the discrepancy was large enough to affect the results as reported by the task. In this particular study, the errors in timing were not large enough to impact the results of the study. The procedure presented in this article offers an alternative method for performing a timing test, which uses readily available hardware and can be used to test the timing in any software program on any operating system and display

Analysis of the quality of online resources for parents of children who are late to talk

© The Author(s) 2020. Background and aims: Internet usage worldwide has become a primary source of health-related information and an important resource for parents to find advice on how to promote their child’s development and well-being. It is important that healthcare professionals understand what information is available to parents online to best support families and children. The current study evaluated the quality of online resources accessible for parents of children who are late to talk. Method: Fifty-four web pages were evaluated for their usability and reliability using the LIDA instrument and Health on the Net Foundation code of conduct certification, and readability using the Flesch Reading Ease Score and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. Origin, author(s), target audience, topics discussed, terminology used, and recommendations were also examined. Results: The majority of websites scored within the moderate range (50–90%) for total LIDA scores and usability, but scored in the low range for reliability (\u3c50%). Significantly higher reliability scores (p \u3c 0.001) were found for sites with Health on the Net Foundation code of conduct certification. Readability fell within the standard range. The largest proportion of websites were American, written by speech-language pathologists, with the most common topics being milestones, tips and strategies, and red flags. Discrepancies were mostly seen in terminology and misinformation, and when present, usually related to risk factors and causes. Conclusion: Prior to recommending websites to parents, health professionals should consider readability of the content, check that information is up-to-date, and confirm website sources and reputable authorship. Health professionals should also be aware of the types of unclear or inaccurate information to which parents of children who are late to talk may be exposed online

What do Speech-Language Pathologists want to know when assessing vocal development in children who are deaf/Hard-of-Hearing?

Abstract Purpose: Delays in vocal development are an early predictor of ongoing language difficulty for children who are deaf/hard-of-hearing (CDHH). Despite the importance of monitoring early vocal development in clinical practice, there are few suitable tools. This study aimed to identify the clinical decisions that speech-language pathologists (SLPs) most want to make when assessing vocal development and their current barriers to doing so. Method: 58 SLPs who provide services to CDHH younger than 22 months completed a survey. The first section measured potential barriers to vocal development assessment. The second section asked SLPs to rate the importance of 15 clinical decisions they could make about vocal development. Results: SLPs believed assessing vocal development was important for other stakeholders, and reported they had the necessary skills and knowledge to assess vocal development. Barriers primarily related to a lack of commercially available tests. SLPs rated all 15 clinical decisions as somewhat or very important. Their top 5 decisions included a variety of assessment purposes that tests are not typically designed to support, including measuring change, differential diagnosis, and goal setting. Conclusions: SLPs wish to make a number of clinical decisions when assessing vocal development in CDHH but lack access to appropriate tools to do so. Future work is needed to develop tools that are statistically equipped to fulfill these purposes. Understanding SLPs’ assessment purposes will allow future tests to better map onto the clinical decisions that SLPs need to make to support CDHH and their families and facilitate implementation into clinical practice

Lessons learned in practice-based research: Studying preschool language interventions in the real world

Abstract Background and aims: Practice-based research holds potential as a promising solution to closing the research-practice gap, because it addresses research questions based on problems that arise in clinical practice and tests whether systems and interventions are effective and sustainable in a clinical setting. One type of practice-based research involves capturing practice by collecting evidence within clinical settings to evaluate the effectiveness of current practices. Here, we describe our collaboration between researchers and clinicians that sought to answer clinician-driven questions about community-based language interventions for young children (Are our interventions effective? What predicts response to our interventions?) and to address questions about the characteristics, strengths, and challenges of engaging in practice-based research. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of 59 young children who had participated in three group language interventions at one publicly funded community clinic between 2012 and 2017. Change on the Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS), a government mandated communicative participation measure, was extracted as the main outcome measure. Potential predictors of growth during intervention were also extracted from the charts, including type of intervention received, attendance, age at the start of intervention, functional communication ability pre-intervention, and time between pre- and post-intervention FOCUS scores. Results: Overall, 49% of children demonstrated meaningful clinical change on the FOCUS after their participation in the language groups. Only 3% of participants showed possibly meaningful clinical change, while the remaining 46% of participants demonstrated not likely meaningful clinical change. There were no significant predictors of communicative participation growth during intervention. Conclusions: Using a practice-based research approach aimed at capturing current practice, we were able to answer questions about the effectiveness of interventions delivered in real-world settings and learn about factors that do not appear to influence growth during these interventions. We also learned about benefits associated with engaging in practice-based research, including high clinical motivation, high external validity, and minimal time/cost investment. Challenges identified were helpful in informing our future efforts to examine other possible predictors through development of a new, clinically feasible checklist, and to pursue methods for improving collection of outcome data in the clinical setting. Implications: Clinicians and researchers can successfully collaborate to answer clinically informed research questions while considering realistic clinical practice and using research-informed methods and principles. Practice-based research partnerships between researchers and clinicians are both valuable and feasible