We have located links that may give you full text access.
Naturalistic Speech-Generating Device Interventions for Children With Complex Communication Needs: A Systematic Review of Single-Subject Studies.
American Journal of Speech-language Pathology 2018 August 7
Purpose: This article presents a systematic review that aimed to synthesize single-subject-design studies that have examined naturalistic interventions for teaching the expressive use of speech-generating devices (SGDs) to children with complex communication needs. Specifically, this review describes what intervention strategies are most commonly applied in studies with positive effects and minimal methodological flaws and examines the populations and outcomes for which these strategies have been effective.
Method: A systematic approach was used to qualitatively code variables of interest to this review. Results were summarized via both visual analysis and effect size methods, and a certainty of evidence methodology was adopted to describe the quality of the evidence.
Results: Thirty-two unique studies met inclusion criteria, with 19 having consistent positive results and meeting minimum requirements for certainty of evidence. Although studies used a variety of titles to describe intervention packages (e.g., milieu teaching, interaction strategies), certain strategies were common across studies. These included (a) creating and capturing communication opportunities via methods such as time delay and questioning; (b) providing feedback via methods such as reinforcement of requests, praise, or expansions; (c) prompting (verbal, physical, gestural); (d) modeling; and (e) training communication partners.
Conclusions: Findings regarding these intervention components help to provide practical guidelines for naturalistic SGD intervention. Limitations of the current body of research (e.g., need to include more home-based studies and more intermediate to advanced SGDs, need to critically analyze the most critical intervention components) provide suggestions for future research.
Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.6615332.
Method: A systematic approach was used to qualitatively code variables of interest to this review. Results were summarized via both visual analysis and effect size methods, and a certainty of evidence methodology was adopted to describe the quality of the evidence.
Results: Thirty-two unique studies met inclusion criteria, with 19 having consistent positive results and meeting minimum requirements for certainty of evidence. Although studies used a variety of titles to describe intervention packages (e.g., milieu teaching, interaction strategies), certain strategies were common across studies. These included (a) creating and capturing communication opportunities via methods such as time delay and questioning; (b) providing feedback via methods such as reinforcement of requests, praise, or expansions; (c) prompting (verbal, physical, gestural); (d) modeling; and (e) training communication partners.
Conclusions: Findings regarding these intervention components help to provide practical guidelines for naturalistic SGD intervention. Limitations of the current body of research (e.g., need to include more home-based studies and more intermediate to advanced SGDs, need to critically analyze the most critical intervention components) provide suggestions for future research.
Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.6615332.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app