Something for everybody? Assessing the suitability of AAC systems for children using stated preference methods.

IF 2.1 3区医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY

Augmentative and Alternative Communication Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1080/07434618.2023.2206582

Edward J D Webb, David Meads, Yvonne Lynch, Nicola Randall, Simon Judge, Juliet Goldbart, Stuart Meredith, Liz Moulam, Stephane Hess, Janice Murray

{"title":"Something for everybody? Assessing the suitability of AAC systems for children using stated preference methods.","authors":"Edward J D Webb, David Meads, Yvonne Lynch, Nicola Randall, Simon Judge, Juliet Goldbart, Stuart Meredith, Liz Moulam, Stephane Hess, Janice Murray","doi":"10.1080/07434618.2023.2206582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Little is known about what features of AAC systems are regarded by AAC professionals as more suitable for children with different characteristics. A survey was conducted in which participants rated the suitability of hypothetical AAC systems on a Likert scale from 1 (very unsuitable) to 7 (very suitable) alongside a discrete choice experiment. The survey was administered online to 155 AAC professionals in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Statistical modeling was used to estimate how suitable 274 hypothetical AAC systems were for each of 36 child vignettes. The proportion of AAC systems rated at least 5 out of 7 for suitability varied from 51.1% to 98.5% for different child vignettes. Only 12 out of 36 child vignettes had any AAC systems rated at least 6 out of 7 for suitability. The features of the most suitable AAC system depended on the characteristics of the child vignette. The results show that, while every child vignette had several systems that had a good suitability rating, there were variations, that could potentially lead to inequalities in provision.","PeriodicalId":49234,"journal":{"name":"Augmentative and Alternative Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Augmentative and Alternative Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2023.2206582","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Little is known about what features of AAC systems are regarded by AAC professionals as more suitable for children with different characteristics. A survey was conducted in which participants rated the suitability of hypothetical AAC systems on a Likert scale from 1 (very unsuitable) to 7 (very suitable) alongside a discrete choice experiment. The survey was administered online to 155 AAC professionals in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Statistical modeling was used to estimate how suitable 274 hypothetical AAC systems were for each of 36 child vignettes. The proportion of AAC systems rated at least 5 out of 7 for suitability varied from 51.1% to 98.5% for different child vignettes. Only 12 out of 36 child vignettes had any AAC systems rated at least 6 out of 7 for suitability. The features of the most suitable AAC system depended on the characteristics of the child vignette. The results show that, while every child vignette had several systems that had a good suitability rating, there were variations, that could potentially lead to inequalities in provision.

查看原文本刊更多论文

每个人都有?使用声明偏好方法评估AAC系统对儿童的适用性。

对于AAC专业人员认为AAC系统的哪些特征更适合具有不同特征的儿童，我们知之甚少。在一项调查中，参与者在李克特量表上对假设的AAC系统的适用性进行了评分，从1(非常不合适)到7(非常合适)，同时进行了离散选择实验。这项在线调查是对大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国的155名AAC专业人士进行的。使用统计模型来估计274个假设的AAC系统对36个儿童小插曲的适合程度。对于不同的儿童，AAC系统在适宜性方面至少获得5分的比例从51.1%到98.5%不等。在36个儿童短片中，只有12个有任何AAC系统的适用性至少在7分中的6分。最合适的AAC系统的特点取决于儿童小插曲的特点。结果表明，虽然每个儿童小插曲都有几个系统具有良好的适用性评级，但存在差异，这可能会导致提供的不平等。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Augmentative and Alternative Communication AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-

CiteScore

2.80

自引率

15.00%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： As the official journal of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (ISAAC), Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) publishes scientific articles related to the field of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) that report research concerning assessment, treatment, rehabilitation, and education of people who use or have the potential to use AAC systems; or that discuss theory, technology, and systems development relevant to AAC. The broad range of topic included in the Journal reflects the development of this field internationally. Manuscripts submitted to AAC should fall within one of the following categories, AND MUST COMPLY with associated page maximums listed on page 3 of the Manuscript Preparation Guide. Research articles (full peer review), These manuscripts report the results of original empirical research, including studies using qualitative and quantitative methodologies, with both group and single-case experimental research designs (e.g, Binger et al., 2008; Petroi et al., 2014). Technical, research, and intervention notes (full peer review): These are brief manuscripts that address methodological, statistical, technical, or clinical issues or innovations that are of relevance to the AAC community and are designed to bring the research community’s attention to areas that have been minimally or poorly researched in the past (e.g., research note: Thunberg et al., 2016; intervention notes: Laubscher et al., 2019).