File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Analysis of Amount and Style of Oral Interaction Related to Language Outcomes in Children with Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review (2006-2016)

TitleAnalysis of Amount and Style of Oral Interaction Related to Language Outcomes in Children with Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review (2006-2016)
Authors
Issue Date2019
PublisherAmerican Speech - Language - Hearing Association. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.asha.org/about/publications/journal-abstracts/jslhr-a/
Citation
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 2019, v. 62 n. 9, p. 3470-3492 How to Cite?
AbstractPurpose: This systematic review summarizes the evidence for differences in the amount of language input between children with and without hearing loss (HL). Of interest to this review is evaluating the associations between language input and language outcomes (receptive and expressive) in children with HL in order to enhance insight regarding what oral language input is associated with good communication outcomes. Method: A systematic review was conducted using keywords in 3 electronic databases: Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Keywords were related to language input, language outcomes, and HL. Titles and abstracts were screened independently, and full-text manuscripts meeting inclusion criteria were extracted. An appraisal checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of studies as poor, good, or excellent. Results: After removing duplicates, 1,545 study results were extracted, with 27 eligible for full-text review. After the appraisal, 8 studies were included in this systematic review. Differences in the amount of language input between children with and without HL were noted. Conversational exchanges, open-ended questions, expansions, recast, and parallel talk were positively associated with stronger receptive and expressive language scores. The quality of evidence was not assessed as excellent for any of the included studies. Conclusions: This systematic review reveals low-level evidence from 8 studies that specific language inputs (amount and style) are optimal for oral language outcomes in children with HL. Limitations were identified as sample selection bias, lack of information on control of confounders and assessment protocols, and limited duration of observation/recordings. Future research should address these limitations.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/272999
ISSN
2021 Impact Factor: 2.674
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.958
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSultana, N-
dc.contributor.authorWong, LLN-
dc.contributor.authorPurdy, SC-
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-06T09:20:40Z-
dc.date.available2019-08-06T09:20:40Z-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 2019, v. 62 n. 9, p. 3470-3492-
dc.identifier.issn1092-4388-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/272999-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: This systematic review summarizes the evidence for differences in the amount of language input between children with and without hearing loss (HL). Of interest to this review is evaluating the associations between language input and language outcomes (receptive and expressive) in children with HL in order to enhance insight regarding what oral language input is associated with good communication outcomes. Method: A systematic review was conducted using keywords in 3 electronic databases: Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Keywords were related to language input, language outcomes, and HL. Titles and abstracts were screened independently, and full-text manuscripts meeting inclusion criteria were extracted. An appraisal checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of studies as poor, good, or excellent. Results: After removing duplicates, 1,545 study results were extracted, with 27 eligible for full-text review. After the appraisal, 8 studies were included in this systematic review. Differences in the amount of language input between children with and without HL were noted. Conversational exchanges, open-ended questions, expansions, recast, and parallel talk were positively associated with stronger receptive and expressive language scores. The quality of evidence was not assessed as excellent for any of the included studies. Conclusions: This systematic review reveals low-level evidence from 8 studies that specific language inputs (amount and style) are optimal for oral language outcomes in children with HL. Limitations were identified as sample selection bias, lack of information on control of confounders and assessment protocols, and limited duration of observation/recordings. Future research should address these limitations.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherAmerican Speech - Language - Hearing Association. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.asha.org/about/publications/journal-abstracts/jslhr-a/-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research-
dc.titleAnalysis of Amount and Style of Oral Interaction Related to Language Outcomes in Children with Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review (2006-2016)-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailWong, LLN: llnwong@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityWong, LLN=rp00975-
dc.description.naturepostprint-
dc.identifier.doi10.1044/2019_JSLHR-L-19-0076-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85072546625-
dc.identifier.hkuros299889-
dc.identifier.volume62-
dc.identifier.issue9-
dc.identifier.spage3470-
dc.identifier.epage3492-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000487244000024-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-
dc.identifier.issnl1092-4388-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats