scholarly journals Response to Letter to the Editor Regarding “ Multi‐Disciplinary Collaborative Consensus Guidance Statement on the Assessment and Treatment of Fatigue in Patients with Post‐Acute Sequelae of SARS‐CoV ‐2 infection ( PASC ).

PM&R ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph E. Herrera ◽  
William N. Niehaus ◽  
Jonathan Whiteson ◽  
Alba Azola ◽  
John M. Baratta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Letter To The Editor ◽  
Assessment And Treatment ◽  
Consensus Guidance

scholarly journals Multi‐Disciplinary Collaborative Consensus Guidance Statement on the Assessment and Treatment of Fatigue in Post‐Acute Sequelae of SARS‐CoV ‐2 infection ( PASC ) Patients

PM&R ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph E. Herrera ◽  
William N. Niehaus ◽  
Jonathan Whiteson ◽  
Alba Azola ◽  
John M. Baratta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Assessment And Treatment ◽  
Consensus Guidance

Letter to the Editor

1978 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 197-200
Author(s):  
Peter B. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Letter To The Editor

The Need for a Broad-Based Model of Phonological Disorders

1992 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan G. Kamhi
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Phonological Disorders ◽  
Production Processes ◽  
Assessment And Treatment ◽  
Speech Delays ◽  
Explanatory Adequacy ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Assessment Procedures ◽  
Treatment Procedures

My response to Fey’s article (1985; reprinted 1992, this issue) focuses on the confusion caused by the application of simplistic phonological definitions and models to the assessment and treatment of children with speech delays. In addition to having no explanatory adequacy, such definitions/models lead either to assessment and treatment procedures that are similarly focused or to procedures that have no clear logical ties to the models with which they supposedly are linked. Narrowly focused models and definitions also usually include no mention of speech production processes. Bemoaning this state of affairs, I attempt to show why it is important for clinicians to embrace broad-based models of phonological disorders that have some explanatory value. Such models are consistent with assessment procedures that are comprehensive in nature and treatment procedures that focus on linguistic, as well as motoric, aspects of speech.

Assessment and Intervention for Children With Limited English Proficiency and Language Disorders

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 77-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celeste Roseberry-McKibbin
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Limited English Proficiency ◽  
English Proficiency ◽  
Language Disorders ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Academic Difficulties ◽  
Language Differences ◽  
Language Impaired ◽  
Number Of Children ◽  
Assessment And Treatment

The number of children with limited English proficiency (LEP) in U.S. public schools is growing dramatically. Speech-language pathologists increasingly receive referrals from classroom teachers for children with limited English proficiency who are struggling in school. The speech-language pathologists are frequently asked to determine if the children have language disorders that may be causing or contributing to their academic difficulties. Most speech-language pathologists are monolingual English speakers who have had little or no coursework or training related to the needs of LEP children. This article discusses practical, clinically applicable ideas for assessment and treatment of LEP children who are language impaired, and gives suggestions for distinguishing language differences from language disorders in children with limited English proficiency.

Letter to the Editor

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-89
Author(s):  
Lawrence I. Shotland
Keyword(s):  
Letter To The Editor

Letter to the Editor

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-87
Author(s):  
David Cieliczka
Keyword(s):  
Letter To The Editor
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document