Search

Background: Very young children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds often show poorer language development. Whilst there have been attempts to provide early intervention programmes, these sometimes miss the most disadvantaged groups. Aims: This report presents preliminary feasibility and effectiveness data for a novel language intervention designed for parents of toddlers in the United Kingdom. Methods and Procedures: In total, 43 UK families of 2–4‐year‐olds were recruited to the study, half of whom completed an 8‐week course (Tots Talking) focussed on parent interaction, and half of whom acted as wait‐list controls. Results and Outcomes: Results suggest that such programmes are feasible for families with 86% staying in the intervention. In addition, greater changes in underlying communication skills such as joint attention and gesture were evident compared to wait‐list controls. Conclusions and Implications: We conclude that pre‐verbal skills may be more important to measure as initial outcomes than language or vocabulary change in this population. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds are at higher risk of communication difficulties and there is a need for community intervention programmes for very young children. What this study adds: This study suggests that such programmes can be feasible and effective, but that very early/basic communicative skills (such as joint attention) may be boosted first rather than language or vocabulary. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Children's centres and other community services could feasibly run short parent facing courses emphasising contingent communication in low SES families and other diverse groups. These may be more successful run with younger preschoolers. Joint attention may be a better focus of intervention before expecting vocabulary or language change. Community health professionals may find this information useful in referring and supporting families in need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Good nutrition in the early years of life is vitally important for a child's development, growth and health. Children's diets in the United Kingdom are known to be poor, particularly among socially disadvantaged groups, and there is a need for timely and appropriate interventions that support parents to improve the diets of young children. The Medical Research Council has highlighted the importance of conducting developmental and exploratory research prior to undertaking full-scale trials to evaluate complex interventions, but have provided very limited detailed guidance on the conduct of these initial phases of research. This paper describes the initial developmental stage and the conduct of an exploratory randomised controlled trial undertaken to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a family-centred early years' nutrition intervention. Choosing Healthy Eating when Really Young ( CHERRY) is a programme for families with children aged 18 months to 5 years, delivered in children's centres in one urban ( Islington) and one rural ( Cornwall) location in the United Kingdom. In the development stage, a mixed-methods approach was used to investigate the nature of the problem and options for support. A detailed review of the evidence informed the theoretical basis of the study and the creation of a logic model. In the feasibility and pilot testing stage of the exploratory trial, 16 children's centres, with a sample of 394 families were recruited onto the study. We hope that the methodology, which we present in this paper, will inform and assist other researchers in conducting community-based, exploratory nutrition research in early years settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech-language interventions are often complex in nature, involving multiple observations, variable outcomes and individualization in treatment delivery. The accepted procedure associated with randomized controlled trials (RCT) of such complex interventions is to develop and implement a manual of intervention in order that reliable treatment delivery can be achieved. Aims: To present the rationale, structure and content of an intensive manualized intervention as implemented within an RCT for children with complex pragmatic and social communication needs; to investigate factors associated with implementation in a mainstream school environment; and to determine treatment fidelity. Methods & Procedures: The manualized SCIP intervention, including procedures for developing individualized treatment plans, was developed and then implemented within an RCT with 57 school-aged children with complex pragmatic communication needs (CwPLI). The paper describes the delivery protocol, staffing requirements, and content and structure of the intervention. A mapping procedure for individualization of intervention and the implemented components of intervention are presented. The findings from a school-therapy alliance checklist for recording factors affecting implementation in a school context are also reported. Treatment fidelity was carried out using measures of delivered versus planned treatment content and quality of therapy. Outcomes & Results: The manual was effective at detailing intervention procedures and allowing for development of individualized treatment plans whilst maintaining satisfactory treatment fidelity. Treatment planning and delivery required continuous specialist speech and language therapist input with assistants needing substantive training and supervision. Key components of intervention for CwPLI were therapies aimed at improving conversation skills, narrative construction, comprehension monitoring, understanding of social cues and metapragmatic awareness. The school-therapy alliance checklist indicated high rates of therapist-education staff and therapist-parent liaison. Parents were nearly always involved in treatment planning though only half-attended therapy sessions. Learning support provision in schools for participating children was highly variable. Conclusions & Implications: Predetermining theoretical background, structure, and content in a treatment manual contributed towards the quality and reliability of intervention within the context of an RCT. The implementation of SCIP intervention in a broader clinical context is discussed with reference to staff expertise, the therapeutic process and the essential ingredients of social communication intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Children who show disproportionate difficulty with the pragmatic as compared with the structural aspects of language are described as having pragmatic language impairment (PLI) or social communication disorder (SCD). Some children who have PLI also show mild social impairments associated with high-functioning autism or autism spectrum disorder (ASD). There is little robust evidence of effectiveness of speech-language interventions which target the language, pragmatic or social communication needs of these children. Aims: To evaluate the effectiveness of an intensive manualized social communication intervention (SCIP) for children who have PLI with or without features of ASD. Methods & Procedures: In a single-blind RCT design, 88 children with pragmatic and social communication needs aged 5;11-10;8, recruited from UK speech and language therapy services, were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to SCIP or to treatment-as-usual. Children in the SCIP condition received up to 20 sessions of direct intervention from a specialist research speech and language therapist working with supervised assistants. All therapy content and methodology was derived from an intervention manual. A primary outcome measure of structural language and secondary outcome measures of narrative, parent-reported pragmatic functioning and social communication, blind-rated perceptions of conversational competence and teacher-reported ratings of classroom learning skills were taken pre-intervention, immediately post-intervention and at 6-month follow-up. Analysis was by intention to treat. Outcomes & Results: No significant treatment effect was found for the primary outcome measure of structural language ability or for a measure of narrative ability. Significant treatment effects were found for blind-rated perceptions of conversational competence, for parent-reported measures of pragmatic functioning and social communication, and for teacher-reported ratings of classroom learning skills. Conclusions & Implications: There is some evidence of an intervention effect on blind and parent/teacher-reported communication outcomes, but not standardized language assessment outcomes, for 6-11-year-old children who have pragmatic and social communication needs. These findings are discussed in the context of the increasingly central role of service user outcomes in providing evidence for an intervention. The substantial overlap between the presence of PLI and ASD (75%) across the whole cohort suggests that the intervention may also be applicable to some verbally able children with ASD who have pragmatic communication needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]