Differential Diagnosis of Childhood Apraxia of Speech Compared to Other Speech Sound Disorders: A Systematic Review
Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the discriminative features that might contribute to differentiation of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) from other speech sound disorders (SSDs). Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for articles or doctoral dissertations that incl...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of speech-language pathology 2021-02, Vol.30 (1), p.279-300 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 300 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 279 |
container_title | American journal of speech-language pathology |
container_volume | 30 |
creator | Murray, Elizabeth Iuzzini-Seigel, Jenya Maas, Edwin Terband, Hayo Ballard, Kirrie J. |
description | Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the discriminative features that might contribute to differentiation of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) from other speech sound disorders (SSDs).
Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for articles or doctoral dissertations that included >= 1 child with CAS and >= 1 child with SSD. Of 2,071 publications screened, 53 met the criteria. Articles were assessed for (a) study design and risk of bias; (b) participant characteristics and confidence in diagnosis; and (c) discriminative perceptual, acoustic, or kinematic measures. A criterion was used to identify promising studies: American Academy of Neurology study design (Class Ilk), replicable participant descriptions and adequate confidence in diagnosis (>= 3), and >= 1 discriminative and reliable measure.
Results: Over 75% of studies were retrospective, case- control designs and/or assessed English-speaking children. Many studies did not fully describe study design and quality. No studies met the Class I (highest) quality rating according to American Academy of Neurology guidelines. CAS was mostly compared to speech delay/phonological disorder. Only six studies had diagnostic confidence ratings of 1 (best). Twenty-six studies reported discriminative perceptual measures, 14 reported discriminative acoustic markers, and four reported discriminative kinematic markers. Measures were diverse, and only two studies directly replicated previous findings. Overall, seven studies met the quality criteria, and another eight nearly met the study criteria to warrant further investigation.
Conclusions: There are no studies of the highest diagnostic quality. There are 15 studies that can contribute to further diagnostic efforts discriminating CAS from other SSDs. Future research should utilize careful diagnostic design, support replication, and adhere to standard reporting guidelines. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1044/2020_AJSLP-20-00063 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2491615676</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A652594687</galeid><sourcerecordid>A652594687</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c476t-d4eee0a6d4f3cfc4251aa68518ef96455e3110cde7ec8c5b7c6be4bcb2f3d1d33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkluL1TAUhYsozjj6CwQpCCJIx9zb41vpeOXAiEefS5rsTDO0TU1Sx_n3pp65OOKD5CGLnW8tsmFl2VOMjjFi7DVBBLX1p932c0FQgRAS9F52iDmvig3G6H7SKGlEBTrIHoVwnhCMCXmYHVCKOS45PszCiTUGPEzRyiE_sfJscsGG3Jm86e2ge-d0Xs9e_rRyHe5mANXnjRtn6UHn0eWnsQd__bBzy6RTTnBegw9v8jrfXYYIo4xW5V_gh4WLx9kDI4cAT67uo-zbu7dfmw_F9vT9x6beFoqVIhaaAQCSQjNDlVGMcCylqDiuwGwE4xxoWlNpKEFVinelEh2wTnXEUI01pUfZy33u7N33BUJsRxsUDIOcwC2hJYxXiLKKVwl9_hd67hY_pd8laoMF5qIUt9SZHKC1k3HRS7WGtrXghG-YqMpEHf-DSkfDaJWbwNg0v2N48YehBznEPrhhidZN4S5I96DyLgQPpp29HaW_bDFq1060t51Isv3dieR6drXb0o2gbzzXJUjAqz1wAZ0zQVmYFNxgawhmqUokKbLS1f_TjY1yXaNJtYj0F1o90Qs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2491615676</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Differential Diagnosis of Childhood Apraxia of Speech Compared to Other Speech Sound Disorders: A Systematic Review</title><source>Education Source</source><source>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /></source><source>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /></source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Murray, Elizabeth ; Iuzzini-Seigel, Jenya ; Maas, Edwin ; Terband, Hayo ; Ballard, Kirrie J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Murray, Elizabeth ; Iuzzini-Seigel, Jenya ; Maas, Edwin ; Terband, Hayo ; Ballard, Kirrie J.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the discriminative features that might contribute to differentiation of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) from other speech sound disorders (SSDs).
Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for articles or doctoral dissertations that included >= 1 child with CAS and >= 1 child with SSD. Of 2,071 publications screened, 53 met the criteria. Articles were assessed for (a) study design and risk of bias; (b) participant characteristics and confidence in diagnosis; and (c) discriminative perceptual, acoustic, or kinematic measures. A criterion was used to identify promising studies: American Academy of Neurology study design (Class Ilk), replicable participant descriptions and adequate confidence in diagnosis (>= 3), and >= 1 discriminative and reliable measure.
Results: Over 75% of studies were retrospective, case- control designs and/or assessed English-speaking children. Many studies did not fully describe study design and quality. No studies met the Class I (highest) quality rating according to American Academy of Neurology guidelines. CAS was mostly compared to speech delay/phonological disorder. Only six studies had diagnostic confidence ratings of 1 (best). Twenty-six studies reported discriminative perceptual measures, 14 reported discriminative acoustic markers, and four reported discriminative kinematic markers. Measures were diverse, and only two studies directly replicated previous findings. Overall, seven studies met the quality criteria, and another eight nearly met the study criteria to warrant further investigation.
Conclusions: There are no studies of the highest diagnostic quality. There are 15 studies that can contribute to further diagnostic efforts discriminating CAS from other SSDs. Future research should utilize careful diagnostic design, support replication, and adhere to standard reporting guidelines.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-0360</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1558-9110</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1044/2020_AJSLP-20-00063</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33151751</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>ROCKVILLE: Amer Speech-Language-Hearing Assoc</publisher><subject>Acoustics ; Apraxia ; Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology ; Children ; Children & youth ; Individualized Instruction ; Kinematics ; Life Sciences & Biomedicine ; Linguistics ; Literature reviews ; Medical diagnosis ; Medical research ; Medicine, Experimental ; Phonology ; Rehabilitation ; Robbins, J ; Science & Technology ; Skill Development ; Social Sciences ; Sound ; Speech ; Speech disorders ; Speech therapy ; Standardized Tests ; Systematic review ; Validity ; Voice disorders</subject><ispartof>American journal of speech-language pathology, 2021-02, Vol.30 (1), p.279-300</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2021 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Jan 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>true</woscitedreferencessubscribed><woscitedreferencescount>18</woscitedreferencescount><woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid>wos000614105200021</woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c476t-d4eee0a6d4f3cfc4251aa68518ef96455e3110cde7ec8c5b7c6be4bcb2f3d1d33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c476t-d4eee0a6d4f3cfc4251aa68518ef96455e3110cde7ec8c5b7c6be4bcb2f3d1d33</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9917-5390 ; 0000-0002-0883-155X ; 0000-0001-7265-3711 ; 0000-0003-4452-2196 ; 0000-0002-7679-2556</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27929,27930,39262,39263</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33151751$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Murray, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iuzzini-Seigel, Jenya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maas, Edwin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Terband, Hayo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ballard, Kirrie J.</creatorcontrib><title>Differential Diagnosis of Childhood Apraxia of Speech Compared to Other Speech Sound Disorders: A Systematic Review</title><title>American journal of speech-language pathology</title><addtitle>AM J SPEECH-LANG PAT</addtitle><addtitle>Am J Speech Lang Pathol</addtitle><description>Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the discriminative features that might contribute to differentiation of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) from other speech sound disorders (SSDs).
Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for articles or doctoral dissertations that included >= 1 child with CAS and >= 1 child with SSD. Of 2,071 publications screened, 53 met the criteria. Articles were assessed for (a) study design and risk of bias; (b) participant characteristics and confidence in diagnosis; and (c) discriminative perceptual, acoustic, or kinematic measures. A criterion was used to identify promising studies: American Academy of Neurology study design (Class Ilk), replicable participant descriptions and adequate confidence in diagnosis (>= 3), and >= 1 discriminative and reliable measure.
Results: Over 75% of studies were retrospective, case- control designs and/or assessed English-speaking children. Many studies did not fully describe study design and quality. No studies met the Class I (highest) quality rating according to American Academy of Neurology guidelines. CAS was mostly compared to speech delay/phonological disorder. Only six studies had diagnostic confidence ratings of 1 (best). Twenty-six studies reported discriminative perceptual measures, 14 reported discriminative acoustic markers, and four reported discriminative kinematic markers. Measures were diverse, and only two studies directly replicated previous findings. Overall, seven studies met the quality criteria, and another eight nearly met the study criteria to warrant further investigation.
Conclusions: There are no studies of the highest diagnostic quality. There are 15 studies that can contribute to further diagnostic efforts discriminating CAS from other SSDs. Future research should utilize careful diagnostic design, support replication, and adhere to standard reporting guidelines.</description><subject>Acoustics</subject><subject>Apraxia</subject><subject>Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Children & youth</subject><subject>Individualized Instruction</subject><subject>Kinematics</subject><subject>Life Sciences & Biomedicine</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medicine, Experimental</subject><subject>Phonology</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Robbins, J</subject><subject>Science & Technology</subject><subject>Skill Development</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Sound</subject><subject>Speech</subject><subject>Speech disorders</subject><subject>Speech therapy</subject><subject>Standardized Tests</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Validity</subject><subject>Voice disorders</subject><issn>1058-0360</issn><issn>1558-9110</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GIZIO</sourceid><sourceid>HGBXW</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkluL1TAUhYsozjj6CwQpCCJIx9zb41vpeOXAiEefS5rsTDO0TU1Sx_n3pp65OOKD5CGLnW8tsmFl2VOMjjFi7DVBBLX1p932c0FQgRAS9F52iDmvig3G6H7SKGlEBTrIHoVwnhCMCXmYHVCKOS45PszCiTUGPEzRyiE_sfJscsGG3Jm86e2ge-d0Xs9e_rRyHe5mANXnjRtn6UHn0eWnsQd__bBzy6RTTnBegw9v8jrfXYYIo4xW5V_gh4WLx9kDI4cAT67uo-zbu7dfmw_F9vT9x6beFoqVIhaaAQCSQjNDlVGMcCylqDiuwGwE4xxoWlNpKEFVinelEh2wTnXEUI01pUfZy33u7N33BUJsRxsUDIOcwC2hJYxXiLKKVwl9_hd67hY_pd8laoMF5qIUt9SZHKC1k3HRS7WGtrXghG-YqMpEHf-DSkfDaJWbwNg0v2N48YehBznEPrhhidZN4S5I96DyLgQPpp29HaW_bDFq1060t51Isv3dieR6drXb0o2gbzzXJUjAqz1wAZ0zQVmYFNxgawhmqUokKbLS1f_TjY1yXaNJtYj0F1o90Qs</recordid><startdate>20210201</startdate><enddate>20210201</enddate><creator>Murray, Elizabeth</creator><creator>Iuzzini-Seigel, Jenya</creator><creator>Maas, Edwin</creator><creator>Terband, Hayo</creator><creator>Ballard, Kirrie J.</creator><general>Amer Speech-Language-Hearing Assoc</general><general>American Speech-Language-Hearing Association</general><scope>17B</scope><scope>BLEPL</scope><scope>DTL</scope><scope>DVR</scope><scope>EGQ</scope><scope>GIZIO</scope><scope>HGBXW</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9917-5390</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0883-155X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7265-3711</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4452-2196</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7679-2556</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210201</creationdate><title>Differential Diagnosis of Childhood Apraxia of Speech Compared to Other Speech Sound Disorders: A Systematic Review</title><author>Murray, Elizabeth ; Iuzzini-Seigel, Jenya ; Maas, Edwin ; Terband, Hayo ; Ballard, Kirrie J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c476t-d4eee0a6d4f3cfc4251aa68518ef96455e3110cde7ec8c5b7c6be4bcb2f3d1d33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Acoustics</topic><topic>Apraxia</topic><topic>Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Children & youth</topic><topic>Individualized Instruction</topic><topic>Kinematics</topic><topic>Life Sciences & Biomedicine</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medicine, Experimental</topic><topic>Phonology</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Robbins, J</topic><topic>Science & Technology</topic><topic>Skill Development</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Sound</topic><topic>Speech</topic><topic>Speech disorders</topic><topic>Speech therapy</topic><topic>Standardized Tests</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Validity</topic><topic>Voice disorders</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Murray, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iuzzini-Seigel, Jenya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maas, Edwin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Terband, Hayo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ballard, Kirrie J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Web of Knowledge</collection><collection>Web of Science Core Collection</collection><collection>Science Citation Index Expanded</collection><collection>Social Sciences Citation Index</collection><collection>Web of Science Primary (SCIE, SSCI & AHCI)</collection><collection>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021</collection><collection>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>American journal of speech-language pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Murray, Elizabeth</au><au>Iuzzini-Seigel, Jenya</au><au>Maas, Edwin</au><au>Terband, Hayo</au><au>Ballard, Kirrie J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Differential Diagnosis of Childhood Apraxia of Speech Compared to Other Speech Sound Disorders: A Systematic Review</atitle><jtitle>American journal of speech-language pathology</jtitle><stitle>AM J SPEECH-LANG PAT</stitle><addtitle>Am J Speech Lang Pathol</addtitle><date>2021-02-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>279</spage><epage>300</epage><pages>279-300</pages><issn>1058-0360</issn><eissn>1558-9110</eissn><abstract>Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the discriminative features that might contribute to differentiation of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) from other speech sound disorders (SSDs).
Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for articles or doctoral dissertations that included >= 1 child with CAS and >= 1 child with SSD. Of 2,071 publications screened, 53 met the criteria. Articles were assessed for (a) study design and risk of bias; (b) participant characteristics and confidence in diagnosis; and (c) discriminative perceptual, acoustic, or kinematic measures. A criterion was used to identify promising studies: American Academy of Neurology study design (Class Ilk), replicable participant descriptions and adequate confidence in diagnosis (>= 3), and >= 1 discriminative and reliable measure.
Results: Over 75% of studies were retrospective, case- control designs and/or assessed English-speaking children. Many studies did not fully describe study design and quality. No studies met the Class I (highest) quality rating according to American Academy of Neurology guidelines. CAS was mostly compared to speech delay/phonological disorder. Only six studies had diagnostic confidence ratings of 1 (best). Twenty-six studies reported discriminative perceptual measures, 14 reported discriminative acoustic markers, and four reported discriminative kinematic markers. Measures were diverse, and only two studies directly replicated previous findings. Overall, seven studies met the quality criteria, and another eight nearly met the study criteria to warrant further investigation.
Conclusions: There are no studies of the highest diagnostic quality. There are 15 studies that can contribute to further diagnostic efforts discriminating CAS from other SSDs. Future research should utilize careful diagnostic design, support replication, and adhere to standard reporting guidelines.</abstract><cop>ROCKVILLE</cop><pub>Amer Speech-Language-Hearing Assoc</pub><pmid>33151751</pmid><doi>10.1044/2020_AJSLP-20-00063</doi><tpages>22</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9917-5390</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0883-155X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7265-3711</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4452-2196</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7679-2556</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1058-0360 |
ispartof | American journal of speech-language pathology, 2021-02, Vol.30 (1), p.279-300 |
issn | 1058-0360 1558-9110 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2491615676 |
source | Education Source; Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />; Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Acoustics Apraxia Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology Children Children & youth Individualized Instruction Kinematics Life Sciences & Biomedicine Linguistics Literature reviews Medical diagnosis Medical research Medicine, Experimental Phonology Rehabilitation Robbins, J Science & Technology Skill Development Social Sciences Sound Speech Speech disorders Speech therapy Standardized Tests Systematic review Validity Voice disorders |
title | Differential Diagnosis of Childhood Apraxia of Speech Compared to Other Speech Sound Disorders: A Systematic Review |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-11T17%3A01%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Differential%20Diagnosis%20of%20Childhood%20Apraxia%20of%20Speech%20Compared%20to%20Other%20Speech%20Sound%20Disorders:%20A%20Systematic%20Review&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20speech-language%20pathology&rft.au=Murray,%20Elizabeth&rft.date=2021-02-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=279&rft.epage=300&rft.pages=279-300&rft.issn=1058-0360&rft.eissn=1558-9110&rft_id=info:doi/10.1044/2020_AJSLP-20-00063&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA652594687%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2491615676&rft_id=info:pmid/33151751&rft_galeid=A652594687&rfr_iscdi=true |