You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Evidence based practice
Original research
Outcome measures for children with speech sound disorder: an umbrella review
  1. Sam Harding1,2,
  2. Sam Burr2,
  3. Joanne Cleland3,
  4. Helen Stringer4,
  5. Yvonne Wren2,5
  1. 1 Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK
  2. 2 Bristol Speech and Language Therapy Research Unit, North Bristol NHS Trust, Westbury on Trym, UK
  3. 3 Psychological Sciences and Health, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK
  4. 4 School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
  5. 5 Bristol Dental School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Sam Harding; sharding.jb{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Objective Speech sound disorder (SSD) describes a ‘persistent difficulty with speech sound production that interferes with speech intelligibility or prevents verbal communication’. There is a need to establish which care pathways are most effective and efficient for children with SSD. Comparison of care pathways requires clearly defined, evidence-based, interventions and agreement on how to measure the outcomes. At present, no definitive list of assessments, interventions or outcomes exists. The objective of this umbrella review paper is to provide a rigorous and detailed list of assessments, interventions and outcomes which target SSD in children.

Design In December 2022, a systematic search of Ovid Medline, OVID Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Cochrane and a number of grey literature platforms were undertaken. 18 reviews were included, and subsequently 415 primary research articles were assessed for data related to assessments, interventions or outcomes. The AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) framework was used to assess the quality of the retained reviews.

Setting Reviews were retained which took place in any setting.

Participants The population is children of any age with a diagnosis of SSD of unknown origin.

Primary and secondary outcome measures Reviews reporting outcomes, assessment and interventions for children with SSD.

Results Extraction and analysis identified 37 assessments, 46 interventions and 30 outcome measures used in research reporting of SSD. Not all of the listed outcomes were linked to specific outcome measurement tools, but these were measurable through the use of one or more of the assessments extracted from the retained reviews.

Conclusions The findings of this review will be used to develop a Core Outcome Set for children with SSD. The findings are part of a rigorous process essential for advancing healthcare research and practice in the specific area of speech and language therapy for children with SSD.

PROSPERO registration number CRD42022316284.

  • community child health
  • patient reported outcome measures
  • systematic review
  • speech pathology

Data availability statement

No data are available.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081446

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    No data are available.

    View Full Text

    Supplementary materials

    Footnotes

    • X @samharding, @yvonnewren

    • Contributors SH devised the search strategy and the data extraction form. SH and SB lead the article refinement and data extraction. SH also wrote the first full draft of the manuscript. SB, JC, HS and YW reviewed, revised and commented on all stages of the review development and completion. All authors reviewed and agreed on final manuscript. SH is the overall guarantor for the work.

    • Funding The authors of this paper are holders of a Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) award (NIHR202766) and are funded in partnership by the NIHR for this research project.

    • Disclaimer The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Institute for Health and Care Research, National Health Service or the UK Department of Health and Social Care.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.