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

Reliability of speech-language pathologists’ categorizations of preschoolers’ communication impairments in practice

Abstract Purpose An efficient and reliable way to categorize children\u27s communication impairments based on routine clinical assessments is needed to inform research and clinical decisions. This preliminary study assessed interrater reliability of speech-language pathologists\u27 categorization of preschoolers\u27 speech, language, and communication impairments using a clinical consensus document. Method Six speech-language pathologists at three community sites worked in pairs to assess 38 children aged 1–5 years, then used the clinical consensus document to categorize children\u27s communication impairments broadly. Identified language and speech sound impairments were further subcategorized. Results Speech-language pathologists had substantial to almost perfect agreement for three broadly focused impairment categories. Agreement for whether language difficulties/disorders were developmental or associated with a biomedical condition was almost perfect, but moderate for whether difficulties impacted receptive or expressive language, or social communication skills. Agreement was fair for rule-based speech delays/disorders, but low for motor-based and mixed speech impairments. Conclusions Results support use of the clinical consensus document to collect data for reliable categories. Additional work is needed to confirm reliability for some broadly focused impairment categories and for subcategorization of speech impairments

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

Developing a Spoken Language Outcome Monitoring Procedure for a Canadian Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Program: Process and Recommendations

Abstract Purpose: Routine spoken language outcome monitoring is one component of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) programs for children who are hard of hearing and learning a spoken language. However, there is no peerreviewed research that documents how spoken language outcome monitoring may be achieved, or what processes EHDI programs can use to develop these procedures. The present article describes the process used by a Canadian EHDI program and the final recommendations that were developed from this process. Methodology: Through consultation with the program’s stakeholders, consideration of the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing’s recommendations, and drawing on our own expertise in spoken language assessment, we developed an overall framework for monitoring spoken language. Based on the needs of the EHDI program, we conducted a scoping review and critical appraisal of norm-referenced tests to identify candidate tests to use within this framework. Results: We recommended a two-pronged assessment approach to measuring spoken language outcomes, including program-level assessment and individual vulnerability testing. We identified several tests that have been previously used to measure spoken language outcomes. There was little consistency in how tests were used across studies with no clear indicators as to which tests are the most appropriate to accomplish for which outcome monitoring purposes. Conclusions: This article reports on the framework and tests used by a Canadian EHDI program to accomplish spoken language outcome monitoring. We highlight different factors that need to be considered when designing spoken language outcome monitoring procedures and the complexity in doing so. Future work evaluating the effectiveness and feasibility of our recommendations is warranted. Keywords: Spoken language outcome monitoring; Program Evaluation Acronyms: CASL = Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language; CDI = Child Development Inventory; CELF = Comprehensive Evaluation of Language Fundamentals; COSMIN = Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments; DEAP = Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation and Phonology; EHDI = Early Hearing Detection and Intervention; EOWPVT = Expressive One Word Vocabulary Test; EVT = Expressive Vocabulary Test; GFTA = Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation; IHP = Infant Hearing Program; KLPA = Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis; MBCDI = MacArthur Bates Communicative Development Inventories; (M)CDI = (Minnesota) Child Development Inventory; MSEL = Mullen Scales of Early Learning; PLAI = Preschool Language Assessment Inventory; PLS = Preschool Language Scale; PPVT= Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test; SLP = speech language pathologist; TACL = Test of Auditory Comprehension of Language, VABS = Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales Acknowledgements: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. This work was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services. The authors would like to thank the speech-language pathologists, audiologists, and program managers who contributed to the development of these procedures and recommendations. We would also like to thank Kelsi Breton for her work in evaluating articles for inclusion and exclusion. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Olivia Daub, Graduate Program in Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Western Ontario, Elborn College, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 1H1. Email: [email protected]

Exploring Practice-Based Clinical–Research Partnerships in Speech-Language Pathology: A Scoping Review

Collaborative partnerships between speech-language pathologists and researchers present an opportunity for practice-based research. For practice-based research to become more widely used in speech-language pathology, a crucial step is outlining the potential purposes and outcomes of these partnership projects. The current article is two-fold. First, we describe a model for practice-based partnerships between researchers and speech-language pathologists. The practice-based research cocreation model developed for this project includes three distinct partnership outcomes: (a) creating practice, (b) capturing current practice, and (c) changing practice. Then, informed by our model, we completed a scoping review to explore the extent and type of practice-based research in the field of speech-language pathology to date. A literature database search identified 3510 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Two independent readers reviewed abstracts and titles to determine articles for further review. Fifty-three articles were reviewed in full and 18 of these were excluded. Data were extracted from the remaining 35 articles. Level of partnership (creating, capturing, or changing) and type of partnership (collaborative or consultative) were coded. A thematic analysis revealed that three of the 35 articles involved creating practice, 19 captured current practice, and 13 were aimed at changing practice. Of the 27 articles in which details were provided about the partnerships between researchers and clinicians, 18 partnerships were collaborative and 9 were consultative. This review offers an initial step in examining the use of practice-based research in speech-language pathology, thereby demonstrating to researchers and clinicians how they can support each other to cocreate clinically relevant researc