JCPSLP March 2013

Computer-assisted assessment and intervention

his issue of the

Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology

focuses

on “Computer assisted assessment and intervention”. As such, it showcases

developments in speech-language pathology (SLP) research and clinical practice in

response to the technological advances of recent years.

Finch, Clark and Hill explored whether the use of tablet computers had the potential

to increase the intensity of therapy for adults with aphasia. In their pilot trial, Finch and

colleagues described the improvements made by two participants in naming items as a

result of the intervention, and reported different benefits and challenges to engaging with

technology for treatment.

Other contributors examined the use of computer programs for intervention with

children. Washington and Warr-Leeper examined the effectiveness of a computer-based

intervention targeting expressive grammar in preschool children with specific language

impairment. They found children who participated in the intervention demonstrated greater

improvements in grammatical complexity and morpheme use, compared to children who

received no intervention. Similarly, Seiler, Leitão and Blosfelds evaluated the effectiveness

of a computer-based program for addressing orthographic processing in three children

with word identification difficulties. Preliminary findings were positive and have encouraged

the authors to conduct further research with a larger sample of children.

Within this issue of

JCPSLP

, regular columns also focus on technology in practice. In

her “Webwords” column, Bowen introduced apps for use in speech-language pathology

intervention and highlighted the importance of evaluating these apps, particularly in terms

of the evidence available to support their use. As one example of the proliferation of apps

available for clinical practice, Winkworth provided a description of her “Top 10” iPad and

iPhone apps suitable for the treatment of clients with voice disorders. She has used these

clinically with success but warns of the need to exercise caution when choosing and using

apps, given the lack of external evidence for many. Sutherland contributed the “What’s

the evidence?” column, reviewing the evidence that exists to support communication

interventions using mobile devices for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

Again, he emphasised the limited research currently available showing the effectiveness

of mobile technologies for children with ASD. Given the great consumer interest in such

technologies, research into the effectiveness of these apps would be timely.

The world of information technology is certainly advancing and expanding at a rapid

rate. We, as speech pathologists, are readily embracing the innovations this technology

offers us, but we are wary of the need to apply them with caution.

Other papers in this issue explore a range of other interesting clinical topics. Freedman

explored the impact of semantic and phonological neighbourhood density on preschool

children’s naming accuracy. Washington, Oddson, Robertson, Rosenbaum, and Thomas-

Stonell described the test-retest and inter-rater reliability of a new clinical outcome measure,

based on the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health – Children

and Youth. Steel, Rose and Eadie developed a clinical tutorial to provide speech-language

pathologists with six key considerations when assessing complex sentences in children with

language impairment.

We have enjoyed reading all of the contributions to this issue of

JCPSLP

and hope that

you do as well. We hope you are encouraged to explore alternative modes of undertaking

assessment and intervention within your research and clinical practice and to consider

sharing the results in future issues of

JCPSLP

From the editors

Anna O’Callaghan and Jane McCormack

From the editors

Using computer-based therapy as

an adjunct to standard anomia

therapy

–

Emma Finch, Kathy Clark

and Anne J. Hill

Growth in expressive grammar

following intervention for 3- to

4-year-old preschoolers with SLI

–

Karla N. Washington and Genese

Warr-Leeper

The effectiveness of a computer-

supported intervention targeting

orthographic processing and

phonological recoding for children

with impaired word identification:

A preliminary study

–

Toni Seiler,

Suze Leitão and Mara Blosfelds

Children’s naming as a function of

neighbourhood density

–

Skott E.

Freedman

Reliability of the Focus on the

Outcomes of Communication Under

Six (FOCUS©)

–

Karla N. Washington,

Bruce Oddson, Bernadette Robertson,

Peter Rosenbaum and Nancy

Thomas-Stonell

Assessment of complex sentences

in children with language

impairment: Six key suggestions

from the literature

–

Gillian Steel,

Miranda Rose and Patricia Eadie

Webwords 45:

Apps for speech-

language pathology intervention

–

Caroline Bowen

Top 10 resources:

iPad and iPhone

apps for voice –

Alison Winkworth

What’s the evidence?

The use of

iPods

or iPads

to support

communication intervention for

children with ASD –

Dean Sutherland

Peer review:

(December 2011

– November 2012)

Digital possibilities and ethical

considerations: Speech-language

pathologists and the web

–

Grant

Meredith, Sally Firmin and

Lindy McAllister

Resource reviews

Around the journals

Contents

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au

JCPSLP

Volume 15, Number 1 2013