↓ Skip to main content

Treatment Model in Children with Speech Disorders and Its Therapeutic Efficiency

Overview of attention for article published in International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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.
Title
Treatment Model in Children with Speech Disorders and Its Therapeutic Efficiency
Published in
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, May 2014
DOI 10.1055/s-0034-1376885
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luciana Barberena, Márcia Keske-Soares, Taís Cervi, Mariane Brandão

Abstract

Introduction Speech articulation disorders affect the intelligibility of speech. Studies on therapeutic models show the effectiveness of the communication treatment. Objective To analyze the progress achieved by treatment with the ABAB-Withdrawal and Multiple Probes Model in children with different degrees of phonological disorders. Methods The diagnosis of speech articulation disorder was determined by speech and hearing evaluation and complementary tests. The subjects of this research were eight children, with the average age of 5:5. The children were distributed into four groups according to the degrees of the phonological disorders, based on the percentage of correct consonants, as follows: severe, moderate to severe, mild to moderate, and mild. The phonological treatment applied was the ABAB-Withdrawal and Multiple Probes Model. The development of the therapy by generalization was observed through the comparison between the two analyses: contrastive and distinctive features at the moment of evaluation and reevaluation. Results The following types of generalization were found: to the items not used in the treatment (other words), to another position in the word, within a sound class, to other classes of sounds, and to another syllable structure. Conclusion The different types of generalization studied showed the expansion of production and proper use of therapy-trained targets in other contexts or untrained environments. Therefore, the analysis of the generalizations proved to be an important criterion to measure the therapeutic efficacy.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 20%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 12 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 31%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 16 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 February 2015.
All research outputs
#20,268,102
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#305
of 645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,122
of 226,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 645 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 226,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.