Research directions in augmentative and alternative communication for preschool children

Ra, Sevcik; Ma, Romski; Adamson, LB

doi:10.1080/09638280412331280352

Cited by 41 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is important to note that a number of reports addressed the successful use of PECS for young children with autism across the age ranges (Bondy & Frost, 1994;Charlop-Christy, Carpenter, Le, LeBlanc & Kellet, 2002;Lerna, Esposito, Conson, & Massagli, 2014;Stahmer & Ingersoll, 2004;Yoder & Stone, 2006). The evidence also spanned participants with a range of disabilities, from apraxia of speech (Bornman, Alant, & Meiring, 2001) or cerebral palsy (Goossens ' , 1989) to intellectual disability (Sevcik, Romski, & Adamson, 2004;Stephenson, 2007) to dual sensory impairments (Harding, Lindsay, O ' Brien, Dipper, & Wright, 2011;Rowland & Schwiegert, 1989;Schwiegert & Rowland, 1992) to autism (Johnston, Nelson, Evans, & Palazolo, 2003;Nunes & Hanline, 2007).…”

Section: Enhancing Child Communication and Language Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Intervention and AAC: What a Difference 30 Years Makes

Romski

Sevcik

Barton-Hulsey

et al. 2015

Augmentative and Alternative Communication

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides an overview of early intervention and AAC over the 30-year period since the founding of the journal Augmentative and Alternative Communication in 1985. It discusses the global context for early intervention and addresses issues pertaining to young children from birth to 6 years of age. It provides a narrative review and synthesis of the evidence base in AAC and early intervention. Finally, it provides implications for practice and future research directions.

show abstract

Section: Enhancing Child Communication and Language Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Intervention and AAC: What a Difference 30 Years Makes

Romski

Sevcik

Barton-Hulsey

et al. 2015

Augmentative and Alternative Communication

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our own work, based on detailed speech and language assessment data from a cohort of 4.5 year old children with CP, 75% of participants had clinical speech and / or language impairments [2]. Communication challenges of any kind can lead to educational and social isolation [3], and can have a detrimental impact on nearly all aspects of development [4-6]. Thus, identifying and treating specific speech and language problems at the earliest possible age is of the utmost importance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech and language development in 2-year-old children with cerebral palsy

Hustad

Allison

McFadd

et al. 2013

Developmental Neurorehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective We examined early speech and language development in children who had cerebral palsy. Questions addressed whether children could be classified into early profile groups on the basis of speech and language skills and whether there were differences on selected speech and language measures among groups. Methods Speech and language assessments were completed on 27 children with CP who were between the ages of 24-30 months (mean age 27.1 months; SD 1.8). We examined several measures of expressive and receptive language, along with speech intelligibility. Results 2-step cluster analysis was used to identify homogeneous groups of children based on their performance on the 7 dependent variables characterizing speech and language performance. Three groups of children identified were those not yet talking (44% of the sample); those whose talking abilities appeared to be emerging (41% of the sample); and those who were established talkers (15% of the sample). Group differences were evident on all variables except receptive language skills. Conclusion 85% of 2 year old children with CP in this study had clinical speech and /or language delays relative to age expectations. Findings suggest that children with CP should receive speech and language assessment and treatment to identify and treat those with delays at or before 2 years of age.

show abstract

“…All participants increased the number of spontaneous requests during the intervention, half acquired use of PECs earlier and for half there was no difference between acquiring use of the VOCA versus PECS. Sevcik et al [74] also reported positive outcomes following the introduction of a SGD, but with only a general description. Other studies described beneficial effects in a child with apraxia of speech [75]; a 3-year-old with lobar holoprosencephaly [76] and a 17-year-old with multiple disabilities [77].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interventions Using High-Technology Communication Devices: A State of the Art Review

Baxter

Enderby

Evans

et al. 2012

Folia Phoniatr Logop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: In the last 20 years the range of high-technology augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) aids has rapidly expanded. This review aimed to provide a ‘state of the art’ synthesis, to provide evidence-based information for researchers, potential users and service providers. Methods: Electronic databases were searched from 2000 to 2010, together with reference lists of included papers and review papers. The review considered work of any design which reported an intervention using high-tech AAC with people who have communication difficulties (excluding those with solely hearing or visual loss) published in peer-reviewed journals. Results: Sixty-five papers reporting interventions using high-tech AAC were identified. There was evidence that high-technology AAC may be beneficial across a range of diagnoses and ages. The evidence, however, is currently drawn from studies using designs considered to be at high risk of bias. Conclusion: The review suggests that the high level of individual variation in outcome requires a greater understanding of characteristics of clients who may or may not benefit from this technology. Also, the wide range of outcomes measured requires further work in the field to establish what a ‘good outcome’ from intervention may be.

show abstract

Research directions in augmentative and alternative communication for preschool children

Abstract: SAL is a viable communication intervention approach for young children.

Cited by 41 publications

References 8 publications

Early Intervention and AAC: What a Difference 30 Years Makes

Early Intervention and AAC: What a Difference 30 Years Makes

Speech and language development in 2-year-old children with cerebral palsy

Interventions Using High-Technology Communication Devices: A State of the Art Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About