January Forum: Evidence-Based Practices and Outcomes for Children With Mild and Unilateral Hearing Loss

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-1
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Outcomes For Children

Evidence-Based Practices and Implementation Science in Special Education

2013 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan G. Cook ◽  
Samuel L. Odom
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Implementation Science ◽  
State Level ◽  
Significant Advance ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Positive Outcomes ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Disciplinary Field ◽  
Outcomes For Children

Establishing a process for identifying evidence-based practices (EBPs) in special education has been a significant advance for the field because it has the potential for generating more effective educational programs and producing more positive outcomes for students with disabilities. However, the potential benefit of EBPs is bounded by the quality, reach, and maintenance of implementation. The cross-disciplinary field of implementation science has great relevance for translating the promise of EBPs into positive outcomes for children and youth with disabilities. This article examines the history, extent, and limitations of EBPs and describes the emergence and current state of implementation science as applied in special education. Subsequent articles in this special issue of Exceptional Children address a range of issues related to implementation science in special education: the research-to-practice gap, dissemination and diffusion, adherence and sustainability, scaling up, a model for state-level implementation, and fostering implementation through professional development.

scholarly journals Evidence-Based Practices and Outcomes for Children with Mild and Unilateral Hearing Loss

2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
The Impact

Purpose This forum provides an overview of current research and clinical practice for children with mild bilateral or unilateral hearing loss. Historically, there has been ambiguity surrounding the need for intervention in this population. Our goal is to explore the literature on outcomes and treatment so that audiologists, speech-language pathologists, teachers, physicians, and families can be confident in the clinical decision-making process when working with these children. To that end, topics include (a) progression of mild hearing loss in children; (b) the impact of mild or unilateral hearing loss on language, listening, and cognitive abilities; (c) research and reviews on intervention approaches; and (d) listening effort and fatigue in unilateral hearing loss. Conclusion Uncertainty about outcomes and treatment approaches for children with mild or unilateral hearing loss leads to inconsistent intervention and increased developmental risk. We hope that this forum will generate productive discussion among researchers and clinicians to ensure that all children with hearing loss reach their full potential.

Evidence-Based Practices Are Not Reformulated Best Practices

2008 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 166-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara R. Schirmer ◽  
Cheri Williams
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Communication Disorders ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Special Series ◽  
Learning To Listen

Communication Disorders Quarterly's special series on evidence-based practices and, specifically, Martindale's article on evidence-based practices in learning to listen, talk, and read among children with significant hearing loss appear to confuse best practices with evidence-based practices and, perhaps more serious, offer little evidence for either. Although the case may be made that evidence-based practices are best practices, best practices are not evidence-based practices unless identified through evaluation of research with criteria agreed on by the research community.

Speech and Language Consequences of Unilateral Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 157 (4) ◽  
pp. 572-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Anne ◽  
Judith E. C. Lieu ◽  
Michael S. Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Speech And Language ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
The Impact

Objective Unilateral hearing loss has been shown to have negative consequences for speech and language development in children. The objective of this study was to systematically review the current literature to quantify the impact of unilateral hearing loss on children, with the use of objective measures of speech and language. Data Sources PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to March 2015. Manual searches of references were also completed. Review Methods All studies that described speech and language outcomes for children with unilateral hearing loss were included. Outcome measures included results from any test of speech and language that evaluated or had age-standardized norms. Due to heterogeneity of the data, quantitative analysis could not be completed. Qualitative analysis was performed on the included studies. Two independent evaluators reviewed each abstract and article. Results A total of 429 studies were identified; 13 met inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Overall, 7 studies showed poorer scores on various speech and language tests, with effects more pronounced for children with severe to profound hearing loss. Four studies did not demonstrate any difference in testing results between patients with unilateral hearing loss and those with normal hearing. Two studies that evaluated effects on speech and language longitudinally showed initial speech problems, with improvement in scores over time. Conclusions There are inconsistent data regarding effects of unilateral hearing loss on speech and language outcomes for children. The majority of recent studies suggest poorer speech and language testing results, especially for patients with severe to profound unilateral hearing loss.

The Colorado Journey Towards Optimal Outcomes for Children With Hearing Loss

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Yoshinaga-Itano
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Diverse Population ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Maternal Bonding ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Optimal Outcomes ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

Abstract It is possible for children who are deaf or hard of hearing to attain language development comparable to their hearing peers, but these outcomes are not guaranteed. The population of children with hearing loss is a diverse population and although the variable of the age of identification is less variable, there are numerous variables that could potentially and have historically impacted language outcomes of children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Variables such as hearing loss, maternal level of education, and maternal bonding can overcome the benefits of earlier identification and intervention.

Monitoring Progress for Children with Hearing Loss

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-81
Author(s):  
Monica Weston ◽  
Karen F. Muñoz ◽  
Kristina Blaiser
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Standardized Measures ◽  
Word Structure ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
Language Measures ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

Purpose This study investigated average hours of daily hearing aid use and speech-language outcomes for children age 3 to 6 years of age with hearing loss. Method Objective measures of hearing aid use were collected via data logging. Speech and language measures included standardized measures GFTA-2, CELF Preschool-2 and additional item analyses for the word structure subtest CELF Preschool-2 and the GFTA-2. Results Hearing aid use was full time for 33% of the children (n=3; M=8.84 hours; Range: 2.9–12.1) at the beginning of the study, and for 78% at the end of the study (n=7; M=9.89 hours; Range 2.6–13.2). All participants demonstrated an improvement in articulation and language standard scores and percentiles however continued to demonstrate areas of weakness in sounds high-frequency in nature. Conclusions Through early identification and fitting, children gain access to speech sounds. Both standardized measures and individual language analysis should be used to identify and support children with hearing loss in language and subsequent literacy development.

Self-Regulation and the Writing Process: Enhancing the Performance of Students With Language and Learning Difficulties

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary A. Troia
Keyword(s):  
Writing Process ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Learning Difficulties ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Struggling Learners ◽  
Evidence Based Practices

Abstract This article first provides an overview of components of self-regulation in writing and specific examples of each component are given. The remainder of the article addresses common reasons why struggling learners experience trouble with revising, followed by evidence-based practices to help students revise their papers more effectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document