Susan H Ebbels, Mollie Gadd, Hilary Nicoll, Lucy Hughes, Nicola Dawson, Caroline Burke, Samuel D Calder, Pauline Frizelle
{"title":"使用 SHAPE CODING 系统对发育性语言障碍儿童进行个性化形态句法目标识别和明确干预的效果以及疗程内剂量的影响。","authors":"Susan H Ebbels, Mollie Gadd, Hilary Nicoll, Lucy Hughes, Nicola Dawson, Caroline Burke, Samuel D Calder, Pauline Frizelle","doi":"10.1044/2024_LSHSS-23-00098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We investigated the effectiveness of a highly individualized morphosyntactic intervention using the SHAPE CODING™ system delivered at different dosages.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Eight children with developmental language disorder aged 8;0-10;10 (years;months) received 10 hr of explicit individualized intervention for morphosyntax delivered in 30-min individual sessions once per week for 20 weeks. Following at least four baseline probe tests, two grammatical targets per session received explicit instruction until they reached criterion (90%), when the next target was introduced. To control for session length and teaching episode density, either both targets received 20 teaching episodes per session or one target received 10 teaching episodes and the other 30. Maintenance testing of completed targets was also carried out.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Scores on probe tests post-intervention were significantly higher than during the baseline phase (<i>d</i> = 1.6) with no change during the baseline or maintenance phases. However, progress during the intervention phase was highly significant. One participant showed significantly faster progress with intervention, while one (with the lowest attention score) made little progress. When considering progress relative to cumulative intervention sessions, progress was faster with 30 teaching episodes per session and slower with 10. However, when cumulative teaching episodes were used as the predictor, all three within-session dosages showed very similar rates of progress, with the odds of a correct response increasing by 3.9% for each teaching episode. The targets that were achieved required an average of 40-60 teaching episodes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With the exception of one participant, the individualized intervention was highly effective and efficient. Thus, the individualized target identification process and intervention method merit further research in a larger group of children. The cumulative number of teaching episodes per target provided across sessions appeared to be key. Thus, clinicians should aim for high teaching episode rates, particularly if the number of sessions is constrained. Otherwise, intervention scheduling can be flexible.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25996168.</p>","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":" ","pages":"803-837"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effectiveness of Individualized Morphosyntactic Target Identification and Explicit Intervention Using the SHAPE CODING System for Children With Developmental Language Disorder and the Impact of Within-Session Dosage.\",\"authors\":\"Susan H Ebbels, Mollie Gadd, Hilary Nicoll, Lucy Hughes, Nicola Dawson, Caroline Burke, Samuel D Calder, Pauline Frizelle\",\"doi\":\"10.1044/2024_LSHSS-23-00098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We investigated the effectiveness of a highly individualized morphosyntactic intervention using the SHAPE CODING™ system delivered at different dosages.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Eight children with developmental language disorder aged 8;0-10;10 (years;months) received 10 hr of explicit individualized intervention for morphosyntax delivered in 30-min individual sessions once per week for 20 weeks. Following at least four baseline probe tests, two grammatical targets per session received explicit instruction until they reached criterion (90%), when the next target was introduced. To control for session length and teaching episode density, either both targets received 20 teaching episodes per session or one target received 10 teaching episodes and the other 30. Maintenance testing of completed targets was also carried out.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Scores on probe tests post-intervention were significantly higher than during the baseline phase (<i>d</i> = 1.6) with no change during the baseline or maintenance phases. However, progress during the intervention phase was highly significant. One participant showed significantly faster progress with intervention, while one (with the lowest attention score) made little progress. When considering progress relative to cumulative intervention sessions, progress was faster with 30 teaching episodes per session and slower with 10. However, when cumulative teaching episodes were used as the predictor, all three within-session dosages showed very similar rates of progress, with the odds of a correct response increasing by 3.9% for each teaching episode. The targets that were achieved required an average of 40-60 teaching episodes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With the exception of one participant, the individualized intervention was highly effective and efficient. Thus, the individualized target identification process and intervention method merit further research in a larger group of children. The cumulative number of teaching episodes per target provided across sessions appeared to be key. Thus, clinicians should aim for high teaching episode rates, particularly if the number of sessions is constrained. Otherwise, intervention scheduling can be flexible.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25996168.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"803-837\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_LSHSS-23-00098\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_LSHSS-23-00098","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Effectiveness of Individualized Morphosyntactic Target Identification and Explicit Intervention Using the SHAPE CODING System for Children With Developmental Language Disorder and the Impact of Within-Session Dosage.
Purpose: We investigated the effectiveness of a highly individualized morphosyntactic intervention using the SHAPE CODING™ system delivered at different dosages.
Method: Eight children with developmental language disorder aged 8;0-10;10 (years;months) received 10 hr of explicit individualized intervention for morphosyntax delivered in 30-min individual sessions once per week for 20 weeks. Following at least four baseline probe tests, two grammatical targets per session received explicit instruction until they reached criterion (90%), when the next target was introduced. To control for session length and teaching episode density, either both targets received 20 teaching episodes per session or one target received 10 teaching episodes and the other 30. Maintenance testing of completed targets was also carried out.
Results: Scores on probe tests post-intervention were significantly higher than during the baseline phase (d = 1.6) with no change during the baseline or maintenance phases. However, progress during the intervention phase was highly significant. One participant showed significantly faster progress with intervention, while one (with the lowest attention score) made little progress. When considering progress relative to cumulative intervention sessions, progress was faster with 30 teaching episodes per session and slower with 10. However, when cumulative teaching episodes were used as the predictor, all three within-session dosages showed very similar rates of progress, with the odds of a correct response increasing by 3.9% for each teaching episode. The targets that were achieved required an average of 40-60 teaching episodes.
Conclusions: With the exception of one participant, the individualized intervention was highly effective and efficient. Thus, the individualized target identification process and intervention method merit further research in a larger group of children. The cumulative number of teaching episodes per target provided across sessions appeared to be key. Thus, clinicians should aim for high teaching episode rates, particularly if the number of sessions is constrained. Otherwise, intervention scheduling can be flexible.
期刊介绍:
Mission: LSHSS publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to the practice of audiology and speech-language pathology in the schools, focusing on children and adolescents. The journal is an international outlet for clinical research and is designed to promote development and analysis of approaches concerning the delivery of services to the school-aged population. LSHSS seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work.
Scope: The broad field of audiology and speech-language pathology as practiced in schools, including aural rehabilitation; augmentative and alternative communication; childhood apraxia of speech; classroom acoustics; cognitive impairment; craniofacial disorders; fluency disorders; hearing-assistive technology; language disorders; literacy disorders including reading, writing, and spelling; motor speech disorders; speech sound disorders; swallowing, dysphagia, and feeding disorders; voice disorders.