A common early intervention approach for preschool children with language problems is parent-child interaction therapy (PCIT). PCIT has positive effects for children with expressive language problems. It appears that speech and language therapists (SLTs) conduct this therapy in many different ways. This might be because of the variety of approaches available, the diverse set of families SLTs work with or the different organizational structures. Understanding the critical components of PCIT would enable SLTs to map the variations that are implemented and researchers to evaluate the effects of such variation. This study aimed to identify the potentially critical components of PCIT based on the practical experience of SLTs and to identify SLTs' rationales for the way they structure PCIT. Both parameters are important for the long term goal, that is, to develop a framework that can be used to support practice. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 SLTs who had at least one year experience in delivering PCIT with preschool children with language impairment. The interviews were transcribed and analysed, using thematic analysis. Analysis of the SLT interview data identified four potentially critical components that underpin the teaching of strategies to parents: parents' engagement, parents' understanding, parents' reflection and therapists' skills. SLTs suggested that all four components are needed for the successful delivery of PCIT. The reasons that SLTs give for the way in which they structure PCIT are mainly based on organizational constraints, family needs and practicalities. SLTs consider PCIT to be valuable but challenging to implement. A framework that makes explicit these components may be beneficial to support practice.

Background Collaboration between parents and speech and language therapists (SLTs) is seen as a key element in family‐centred models. Collaboration can have positive impacts on parental and children's outcomes. However, collaborative practice has not been well described and researched in speech and language therapy for children and may not be easy to achieve. It is important that we gain a deeper understanding of collaborative practice with parents, how it can be achieved and how it can impact on outcomes. This understanding could support practitioners in daily practice with regard to achieving collaborative practice with parents in different contexts. Aims To set a research agenda on collaborative practice between parents and SLTs in order to generate evidence regarding what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent. Methods & Procedures A realist evaluation approach was used to make explicit what collaborative practice with parents entails. The steps suggested by the RAMESES II project were used to draft a preliminary programme theory about collaborative practice between parents and SLTs. This process generates explicit hypotheses which form a potential research agenda. Discussion & Conclusions A preliminary programme theory of collaborative practice with parents was drafted using a realist approach. Potential contextual factors (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O) were presented which could be configured into causal mechanisms to help explain what works for whom in what circumstances. CMO configurations were drafted, based on the relevant literature, which serve as exemplars to illustrate how this methodology could be used. In order to debate, test and expand our hypothesized programme theory for collaborative practice with parents, further testing against a broader literature is required alongside research to explore the functionality of the configurations across contexts. This paper highlights the importance of further research on collaborative practice with parents and the potential value of realist evaluation methodology. What this paper adds Current policy in education, health and social care advocates for family‐centred care and collaborative practice with parents. Thereby, collaborative practice is the preferred practice for SLTs and parents. In this paper, we explore collaborative practice and use a realist evaluation approach to achieve the aim of setting a research agenda in this area. Researchers use realist evaluation, a methodology originally developed by Pawson and Tilley in the 1990s, to explore the causal link between interventions and outcomes, summarized as what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent. Realist evaluation provides a framework to explore configurations between contexts (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O). We used this methodology to take a first step at making expli...

Background Parents’ play an essential role in Parent–Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) as the primary agent of intervention with their child. Unfortunately, speech and language therapists (SLTs) report that parents’ engagement is challenging when conducting PCIT. Although focusing on and stimulating the engagement of parents, when needed, can increase the success of PCIT, little is known about what factors influence parent engagement. Aims To explore SLTs’ views about the factors that facilitate or pose barriers to parents’ engagement in PCIT. Methods & Procedures A secondary analysis of 10 interview transcripts about SLTs’ views on delivering PCIT with parents of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) was conducted. Codes from the original analysis where checked for their relevance to parents’ engagement by the first author. Potential themes were identified iteratively with all authors. Outcomes & Results Four themes were identified in the SLTs’ description of their experiences with the engagement of parents: mutual understanding, creating a constructive relationship between the SLT and parent, parental empowerment, and barriers. It became clear that SLTs were focusing on different aspects of engagement. Conclusions & Implications This study makes an initial contribution to our understanding of SLTs’ view of parents’ engagement and about what stimulates parent engagement or effects disengagement. SLTs play an important role in supporting parents to engage and stay engaged with therapy. Training SLTs on how best to engage parents, focusing on mutual understanding, creating constructive relationships between the SLT and parent, parental empowerment, and barriers, is necessary. However, more research is needed on how to train relevant skills in SLTs. Clearer definitions of engagement would improve understanding and judgements about how best to support parents.

Purpose Most speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working with children with developmental language disorder (DLD) do not perform language sample analysis (LSA) on a regular basis, although they do regard LSA as highly informative for goal setting and evaluating grammatical therapy. The primary aim of this study was to identify facilitators, barriers, and needs related to performing LSA by Dutch SLPs working with children with DLD. The secondary aim was to investigate whether a training would change the actual performance of LSA. Method A focus group with 11 SLPs working in Dutch speech-language pathology practices was conducted. Barriers, facilitators, and needs were identified using thematic analysis and categorized using the theoretical domain framework. To address the barriers, a training was developed using software program CLAN. Changes in barriers and use of LSA were evaluated with a survey sent to participants before, directly after, and 3 months posttraining. Results The barriers reported in the focus group were SLPs' lack of knowledge and skills, time investment, negative beliefs about their capabilities, differences in beliefs about their professional role, and no reimbursement from health insurance companies. Posttraining survey results revealed that LSA was not performed more often in daily practice. Using CLAN was not the solution according to participating SLPs. Time investment remained a huge barrier. Conclusions A training in performing LSA did not resolve the time investment barrier experienced by SLPs. User-friendly software, developed in codesign with SLPs might provide a solution. For the short-term, shorter samples, preferably from narrative tasks, should be considered.