↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Parent-mediated communication interventions for improving the communication skills of preschool children with non-progressive motor disorders

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

7 tweeters


16 Dimensions

Readers on

386 Mendeley
Parent-mediated communication interventions for improving the communication skills of preschool children with non-progressive motor disorders
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012507.pub2
Pubmed ID

Lindsay Pennington, Wanwuri A Akor, Kate Laws, Juliet Goldbart


Children with motor disorders can have difficulties in producing accurate and consistent movements for speech, gesture or facial expression (or a combination of these), making their communication difficult to understand. Parents may be offered training to help recognise and interpret their child's signals and to stimulate their children's development of new communication skills. To assess the effectiveness of parent-mediated communication interventions, compared to no intervention, treatment as usual or clinician-mediated interventions, for improving the communication skills of preschool children up to five years of age who have non-progressive motor disorders. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, 12 other databases and three trials registers in July 2017. We also searched the reference lists of relevant papers and reviews, and contacted experts working in the field to find unpublished studies. We included studies that used randomised or quasi-randomised designs; compared a parent-mediated communication intervention with no treatment, treatment as usual or clinician-mediated therapy; and included children with non-progressive motor disorders up to five years of age. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. This review included two randomised controlled trials involving 38 children (20 boys, 18 girls), aged 15 to 96 months, and their mothers. All children had developmental disabilities; 10 had motor disorders, but it was unclear if these motor disorders affected their gestural, vocal or verbal communication. Mothers attended eight group training sessions over 11 to 12 weeks and received two or three home visits. Outcomes were assessed immediately after training. We found no report of longer-term follow-up. One study took place at an intervention centre in Canada and the other in South Korea.Both studies recruited small numbers of participants from single centres. Since it is not possible to blind participants attending or therapists providing training to group allocation, we considered both studies to be at high risk of performance bias. We also rated one study at high risk of attrition bias, and both studies at low risk of reporting bias.There was very low-quality evidence for all outcomes assessed. There was no evidence of an effect of training for children's initiation of conversation or engagement in joint attention during interaction with their mothers. Mothers who received training became more responsive to their children's communication, but there were no differences in the extent to which they controlled conversation by directing their children. Missing data meant that we were unable to evaluate the effects of training on children's frequency of communication, frequency of spoken language in conversation, speech production, or receptive or expressive language development. There were no effects on maternal stress. We found no reports of the effects of parent training on children's use of individual communication skills, such as asking questions or providing information, on their generic participation or adverse outcomes. Neither did we find reports of mothers' satisfaction with treatment, its acceptability or their compliance with it. There is only limited, very low quality evidence that parent-mediated communication interventions may be associated with improvements in interaction between mothers and their preschool children who have motor disorders. The indirectness of the study samples and high risk of bias in the included the studies significantly limits our confidence in the evidence, as do issues with study design and lack of detail in results. It is not clear if training has been tested with children whose motor disorders limit the consistency and accuracy of movements underpinning spoken or gestural communication. Some speech and language therapists currently provide communication training for parents. Further research, with larger numbers of children whose movement disorders affect their speech and gestures, coupled with detailed reporting of children's baseline skills, is needed to test whether communication training for parents can help them to promote the communication development of their young children with movement disorders.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 386 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 386 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 55 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 10%
Student > Bachelor 35 9%
Researcher 25 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 5%
Other 64 17%
Unknown 147 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 49 13%
Psychology 39 10%
Social Sciences 24 6%
Sports and Recreations 6 2%
Other 48 12%
Unknown 160 41%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 August 2018.
All research outputs
of 23,308,124 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 12,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 330,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,308,124 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,457 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 330,313 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.