Response to Ingham (2005) I am hard pressed to see how Professor Ingham saw my article (or any of the others, for that matter) as endorsing non-evidence-based clinical practice in stuttering. I mention in many places the very slim research base on which many long-standing recommendations are made, and call for well-controlled intervention studies ... Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor  |   April 01, 2005
Response to Ingham (2005)
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Nan Bernstein Ratner
    University of Maryland, College Park
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Fluency Disorders / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Letters to the Editor
Letter to the Editor   |   April 01, 2005
Response to Ingham (2005)
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 2005, Vol. 36, 157-159. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2005/016)
History: Received September 14, 2004 , Accepted October 25, 2004
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 2005, Vol. 36, 157-159. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2005/016)
History: Received September 14, 2004; Accepted October 25, 2004
I am hard pressed to see how Professor Ingham saw my article (or any of the others, for that matter) as endorsing non-evidence-based clinical practice in stuttering. I mention in many places the very slim research base on which many long-standing recommendations are made, and call for well-controlled intervention studies to either validate or refute them. That was a major focus of my article.
Ingham’s contention that there are no data to support the notion that slowed adult speech rate may reduce disfluencies in some cases, as I am careful to note, is nothing more than Monday morning quarterbacking, in which he argues with the opinions not only of the studies’ authors, but also of the peer-review panels that found the cited works of publishable quality. It is perhaps unfortunate that Ingham does not review each and every published article in our field to make sure it meets his exacting standards, because he finds much at fault in almost all of the issue’s cited research, regardless of author (he is happy to reference, however, non-peer-reviewed books written or edited by authors he prefers in defense of some of his arguments). I note in my case that he also picks and chooses from the studies that I cite, pulling apart those he doesn’t like and conveniently ignoring others that I discuss. His painstaking critique certainly amplifies my call for further research but does not amount to a lack of evidence for this rather benign parent counseling component. I am pleased to note that we are in agreement that there is no evidence base for suggesting that parents alter language style in speaking to stuttering children, a major focus of my discussion. Sometimes evidence-based practice begins by noting that common recommendations haven’t got any evidence behind them, as Ingham repeatedly stresses.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access