↓ Skip to main content

Service delivery and intervention intensity for phonology‐based speech sound disorders

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
64 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
187 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Service delivery and intervention intensity for phonology‐based speech sound disorders
Published in
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, June 2018
DOI 10.1111/1460-6984.12399
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

When planning evidence-based intervention services for children with phonology-based speech sound disorders (SSD), speech and language therapists (SLTs) need to integrate research evidence regarding service delivery and intervention intensity within their clinical practice. However, relatively little is known about the optimal intensity of phonological interventions and whether SLTs' services align with the research evidence. The aims are twofold. First, to review external evidence (i.e., empirical research evidence external to day-to-day clinical practice) regarding service delivery and intervention intensity for phonological interventions. Second, to investigate SLTs' clinical practice with children with phonology-based SSD in Australia, focusing on service delivery and intensity. By considering these complementary sources of evidence, SLTs and researchers will be better placed to understand the state of the external evidence regarding the delivery of phonological interventions and appreciate the challenges facing SLTs in providing evidence-based services. Two studies are presented. The first is a review of phonological intervention research published between 1979 and 2016. Details regarding service delivery and intervention intensity were extracted from the 199 papers that met inclusion criteria identified through a systematic search. The second study was an online survey of 288 SLTs working in Australia, focused on the service delivery and intensity of intervention provided in clinical practice. There is a gap between the external evidence regarding service delivery and intervention intensity and the internal evidence from clinical practice. Most published intervention research has reported to provide intervention two to three times per week in individual sessions delivered by an SLT in a university clinic, in sessions lasting 30-60 min comprising 100 production trials. SLTs reported providing services at intensities below that found in the literature. Further, they reported workplace, client and clinician factors that influenced the intensity of intervention they were able to provide to children with phonology-based SSD. Insufficient detail in the reporting of intervention intensity within published research coupled with service delivery constraints may affect the implementation of empirical evidence into everyday clinical practice. Research investigating innovative solutions to service delivery challenges is needed to provide SLTs with evidence that is relevant and feasible for clinical practice.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 187 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Student > Bachelor 14 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Researcher 11 6%
Other 32 17%
Unknown 78 42%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 40 21%
Social Sciences 17 9%
Linguistics 14 7%
Psychology 11 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 4%
Other 14 7%
Unknown 83 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,179,229
of 29,282,182 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
#63
of 1,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,987
of 348,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,282,182 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,237 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,701 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.