| Title |
Non‐speech oral motor treatment for children with developmental speech sound disorders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009383.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alice S‐Y Lee, Fiona E Gibbon |
| Abstract |
Children with developmental speech sound disorders have difficulties in producing the speech sounds of their native language. These speech difficulties could be due to structural, sensory or neurophysiological causes (e.g. hearing impairment), but more often the cause of the problem is unknown. One treatment approach used by speech-language therapists/pathologists is non-speech oral motor treatment (NSOMT). NSOMTs are non-speech activities that aim to stimulate or improve speech production and treat specific speech errors. For example, using exercises such as smiling, pursing, blowing into horns, blowing bubbles, and lip massage to target lip mobility for the production of speech sounds involving the lips, such as /p/, /b/, and /m/. The efficacy of this treatment approach is controversial, and evidence regarding the efficacy of NSOMTs needs to be examined. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | 21% |
| Australia | 5 | 13% |
| Chile | 2 | 5% |
| United States | 2 | 5% |
| Ireland | 2 | 5% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 29 | 76% |
| Scientists | 8 | 21% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 502 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 500 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 70 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 62 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 49 | 10% |
| Researcher | 33 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 25 | 5% |
| Other | 80 | 16% |
| Unknown | 183 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 89 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 70 | 14% |
| Psychology | 42 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 27 | 5% |
| Linguistics | 15 | 3% |
| Other | 62 | 12% |
| Unknown | 197 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,401,236
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,981
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,613
of 277,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#70
of 244 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 244 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.