Catálogo de publicaciones - revistas

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is an intervention approach that can promote communication and language in children with multiple disabilities who are beginning communicators. While a wide range of AAC technologies are available, little is known about the comparative effects of specific technology options. Given that engagement can be low for beginning communicators with multiple disabilities, the current study provides initial information about the comparative effects of 2 AAC technology options—high-tech visual scene displays (VSDs) and low-tech isolated picture symbols—on engagement.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Method</jats:title> <jats:p>Three elementary-age beginning communicators with multiple disabilities participated. The study used a single-subject, alternating treatment design with each technology serving as a condition. Participants interacted with their school speech-language pathologists using each of the 2 technologies across 5 sessions in a block randomized order.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>According to visual analysis and nonoverlap of all pairs calculations, all 3 participants demonstrated more engagement with the high-tech VSDs than the low-tech isolated picture symbols as measured by their seconds of gaze toward each technology option. Despite the difference in engagement observed, there was no clear difference across the 2 conditions in engagement toward the communication partner or use of the AAC.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>Clinicians can consider measuring engagement when evaluating AAC technology options for children with multiple disabilities and should consider evaluating high-tech VSDs as 1 technology option for them. Future research must explore the extent to which differences in engagement to particular AAC technologies result in differences in communication and language learning over time as might be expected.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>Researchers in the cognitive sciences have identified several key training strategies that support good encoding and retention of target information. These strategies are retrieval-based practice, also known as learning through testing, and spaced practice. The recent resurgence of research on retrieval-based and spaced practice has been extended to investigate the effectiveness of these strategies to support learning in individuals with language disorders. The purpose of the current article is to review key principles of retrieval-based and spaced practice that can be used to support word learning in individuals within clinical and educational contexts.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>Current research provides evidence that principles of retrieval-based and spaced practice can enhance word learning for individuals with language disorders. Current research provides guidance for clinicians on how to implement these strategies both within and across sessions to support encoding and retention of target information. Additional research should be conducted to provide a better understanding of how to optimize encoding and retention in clinical and educational contexts. Most notably, research that examines long-term retention after interventions are withdrawn would further our understanding of how these principles can be optimally applied to improve outcomes for individuals with language disorders.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>The purpose of this study was to characterize social communication and structural language of school-age girls with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder (HF-ASD) compared to a matched group of girls who are typically developing (TD).</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Method</jats:title> <jats:p>Participants were 37 girls between 7;5 and 15;2 (years;months)—18 HF-ASD and 19 TD. Children completed the Test of Pragmatic Language–Second Edition (TOPL-2) and Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals–Fifth Edition. Parents completed the Children's Communication Checklist–2 United States Edition (CCC-2) and Receptive and Expressive Communication subdomains of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales–Second Edition.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>In the area of social communication, girls with HF-ASD earned significantly lower scores and were more often classified as having an impairment on the TOPL-2 and the CCC-2. However, 28% and 33% earned average scores on the TOPL-2 and the CCC-2, respectively. In the area of structural language, no significant differences were found between groups on Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals–Fifth Edition indexes. In contrast, girls with HF-ASD earned significantly lower scores and were more often classified as having an impairment on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales–Second Edition. Sixty-one percent and 83% scored below average on the Receptive and Expressive Communication subdomains, respectively.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>It has been argued that girls with HF-ASD, when compared to boys with HF-ASD, may have advantages for social communication and structural language that mask their impairments. However, when compared to girls who are TD, girls with HF-ASD demonstrated impaired social communication and structural language. Clinicians should include and carefully examine multiple sources of information when assessing girls with HF-ASD.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>The aim of this study was to examine the degree to which quantitative aspects of dosage (dose, dose frequency, and total intervention duration) have been examined in intervention studies for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). Additionally, to establish the optimal quantitative dosage characteristics for phonology, vocabulary, and morphosyntax outcomes.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Method</jats:title> <jats:p> This registered review (PROSPERO ID CRD42017076663) adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Search terms were included in seven electronic databases. We included peer-reviewed quasi-experimental, randomized controlled trial or cohort analytical studies, published in any language between January 2006 and May 2020. Included articles reported on participants with DLD ( <jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 3–18 years); oral language interventions with phonology, vocabulary, or morphosyntax outcomes; and experimental manipulation or statistical analysis of any quantitative aspect of dosage. Studies were appraised using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. </jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Two hundred forty-four articles reported on oral language interventions with children with DLD in the domains of interest; 13 focused on experimentally/statistically manipulating quantitative aspects of dosage. No article reported phonological outcomes, three reported vocabulary, and eight reported morphosyntax. Dose frequency was the most common characteristic manipulated.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>Research is in its infancy, and significant further research is required to inform speech-language pathologists in practice. Dosage characteristics are rarely adequately controlled for their individual effects to be identified. Findings to date suggest that there is a point in vocabulary and morphosyntax interventions after which there are diminishing returns from additional dosage. If dose is high (number of learning opportunities within a session), then the literature suggests that session frequency can be reduced. Frequent, short sessions (2/3 × per week, approximately 2 min) and less frequent, long sessions (1 × per week, approximately 20 min) have yielded the best outcomes when composite language measures have been used; however, replication and further research are required before clinicians can confidently integrate these findings into clinical practice.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Supplemental Material</jats:title> <jats:p> <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13570934">https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13570934</jats:ext-link> </jats:p> </jats:sec>

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Purpose:</jats:title> <jats:p>In spite of improvements in language outcomes for children with hearing loss (HL) arising from cochlear implants (CIs), these children can falter when it comes to academic achievement, especially in higher grades. Given that writing becomes increasingly relevant to educational pursuits as children progress through school, this study explored the hypothesis that one challenge facing students with CIs may be written language.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Method:</jats:title> <jats:p>Participants were 98 eighth graders: 52 with normal hearing (NH) and 46 with severe-to-profound HL who used CIs. Oral and written narratives were elicited and analyzed for morphosyntactic complexity and global narrative features. Five additional measures were collected and analyzed as possible predictors of morphosyntactic complexity: Sentence Comprehension of Syntax, Grammaticality Judgment, Expressive Vocabulary, Forward Digit Span, and Phonological Awareness.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results:</jats:title> <jats:p>For oral narratives, groups performed similarly on both morphosyntactic complexity and global narrative features; for written narratives, critical differences were observed. Compared with adolescents with NH, adolescents with CIs used fewer markers of morphosyntactic complexity and scored lower on several global narrative features in their written narratives. Adolescents with NH outperformed those with CIs on all potential predictor measures, except for Sentence Comprehension of Syntax. Moderately strong relationships were found between predictor variables and individual measures of morphosyntactic complexity, but no comprehensive pattern explained the results. Measures of morphosyntactic complexity and global narrative features were not well correlated, suggesting these measures are assessing separate underlying constructs.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions:</jats:title> <jats:p>Adolescents with CIs fail to show writing proficiency at high school entry equivalent to that of their peers with NH, which could constrain their academic achievement. Interventions for children with CIs need to target writing skills, and writing assessments should be incorporated into diagnostic assessments.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Supplemental Material:</jats:title> <jats:p> <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.17139059">https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.17139059</jats:ext-link> </jats:p> </jats:sec>