Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools Vol.42 102-139 April 2011. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2010/09-0075)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Baker, E.
Right arrow Articles by McLeod, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Baker, E.
Right arrow Articles by McLeod, S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Article

Evidence-Based Practice for Children With Speech Sound Disorders: Part 1 Narrative Review

Elise Bakera
Sharynne McLeodb
a The University of Sydney, Australia
b Charles Sturt University, Australia

Correspondence to Elise Baker: elise.baker{at}sydney.edu.au

Purpose: This article provides a comprehensive narrative review of intervention studies for children with speech sound disorders (SSD). Its companion paper (Baker & McLeod, 2011) provides a tutorial and clinical example of how speech-language pathologists (SLPs) can engage in evidence-based practice (EBP) for this clinical population.

Method: Studies reporting speech sound intervention for children with SSDs published from 1979 to 2009 were identified and coded.

Results: One hundred thirty-four intervention studies were identified. Intervention typically was conducted by an SLP in a one-to-one individual format for 30- to 60-min sessions 2 to 3 times per week. Total duration of intervention (from assessment to discharge) was reported for 10 studies and ranged from 3 to 46 months. Most studies were either Level IIb (quasi-experimental studies, 41.5%) or Level III (nonexperimental case studies, 32.6%). Single-case experimental design (29.6%) was the most frequently used experimental research design. There were 7 distinct approaches to target selection and 46 distinct intervention approaches, with 23 described in more than 1 publication. Each approach was associated with varying quantities and levels of evidence, according to research design.

Conclusion: Collaborative research reflecting higher levels of evidence using rigorous experimental designs is needed to compare the relative benefits of different intervention approaches.

KEY WORDS: evidence-based practice, intervention, speech sound disorders, phonology


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?