Commentary on “Treatment Decisions for Children With Speech–Sound Disorders”: Revisiting the Past in EBP Purpose This commentary, written in response to Alan Kamhi’s paper, “Treatment Decisions for Children with Speech–Sound Disorders,” further considers the “what” or goal selection process of decision making with the aim of efficiency—getting the most change in the shortest time. Method My comments reflect a focus on the ... Clinical Forum
Clinical Forum  |   October 01, 2006
Commentary on “Treatment Decisions for Children With Speech–Sound Disorders”: Revisiting the Past in EBP
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ann A. Tyler
    University of Nevada, Reno
  • Contact author: Ann A. Tyler, PhD, University of Nevada, Reno, Speech Pathology and Audiology, Mail Stop 152, Reno, NV 89557. E-mail: anntyler@med.unr.edu
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Clinical Forum
Clinical Forum   |   October 01, 2006
Commentary on “Treatment Decisions for Children With Speech–Sound Disorders”: Revisiting the Past in EBP
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, October 2006, Vol. 37, 280-283. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2006/032)
History: Received March 22, 2006 , Accepted June 26, 2006
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, October 2006, Vol. 37, 280-283. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2006/032)
History: Received March 22, 2006; Accepted June 26, 2006
Web of Science® Times Cited: 4

Purpose This commentary, written in response to Alan Kamhi’s paper, “Treatment Decisions for Children with Speech–Sound Disorders,” further considers the “what” or goal selection process of decision making with the aim of efficiency—getting the most change in the shortest time.

Method My comments reflect a focus on the client values piece of the evidence-based practice (EBP) triad through validating treatment decisions for individual clients using generalization data. Such data are ideal for demonstrating change according to specific benchmarks and suggesting that treatment was responsible for this change. Consideration is also given to deficit profiles and their implications for long-term outcomes when validating the effects of treatment.

Conclusion Although the abundance of evidence suggests that a variety of treatment approaches are effective for children with speech–sound disorders, less is known about which are most efficient as compared to one another or for which specific children. Practitioners, however, are embracing EBP when they select a treatment by matching the research evidence with a client’s profile, collect systematic data, and use those data to demonstrate that change is attributable to treatment.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access