Edward J D Webb, David Meads, Yvonne Lynch, Nicola Randall, Simon Judge, Juliet Goldbart, Stuart Meredith, Liz Moulam, Stephane Hess, Janice Murray
{"title":"每个人都有?使用声明偏好方法评估AAC系统对儿童的适用性。","authors":"Edward J D Webb, David Meads, Yvonne Lynch, Nicola Randall, Simon Judge, Juliet Goldbart, Stuart Meredith, Liz Moulam, Stephane Hess, Janice Murray","doi":"10.1080/07434618.2023.2206582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Little is known about what features of AAC systems are regarded by AAC professionals as more suitable for children with different characteristics. A survey was conducted in which participants rated the suitability of hypothetical AAC systems on a Likert scale from 1 (<i>very unsuitable</i>) to 7 (<i>very suitable</i>) alongside a discrete choice experiment. The survey was administered online to 155 AAC professionals in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Statistical modeling was used to estimate how suitable 274 hypothetical AAC systems were for each of 36 child vignettes. The proportion of AAC systems rated at least 5 out of 7 for suitability varied from 51.1% to 98.5% for different child vignettes. Only 12 out of 36 child vignettes had any AAC systems rated at least 6 out of 7 for suitability. The features of the most suitable AAC system depended on the characteristics of the child vignette. The results show that, while every child vignette had several systems that had a good suitability rating, there were variations, that could potentially lead to inequalities in provision.</p>","PeriodicalId":49234,"journal":{"name":"Augmentative and Alternative Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Something for everybody? Assessing the suitability of AAC systems for children using stated preference methods.\",\"authors\":\"Edward J D Webb, David Meads, Yvonne Lynch, Nicola Randall, Simon Judge, Juliet Goldbart, Stuart Meredith, Liz Moulam, Stephane Hess, Janice Murray\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07434618.2023.2206582\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Little is known about what features of AAC systems are regarded by AAC professionals as more suitable for children with different characteristics. A survey was conducted in which participants rated the suitability of hypothetical AAC systems on a Likert scale from 1 (<i>very unsuitable</i>) to 7 (<i>very suitable</i>) alongside a discrete choice experiment. The survey was administered online to 155 AAC professionals in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Statistical modeling was used to estimate how suitable 274 hypothetical AAC systems were for each of 36 child vignettes. The proportion of AAC systems rated at least 5 out of 7 for suitability varied from 51.1% to 98.5% for different child vignettes. Only 12 out of 36 child vignettes had any AAC systems rated at least 6 out of 7 for suitability. The features of the most suitable AAC system depended on the characteristics of the child vignette. The results show that, while every child vignette had several systems that had a good suitability rating, there were variations, that could potentially lead to inequalities in provision.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Augmentative and Alternative Communication\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Augmentative and Alternative Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2023.2206582\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Augmentative and Alternative Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2023.2206582","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Something for everybody? Assessing the suitability of AAC systems for children using stated preference methods.
Little is known about what features of AAC systems are regarded by AAC professionals as more suitable for children with different characteristics. A survey was conducted in which participants rated the suitability of hypothetical AAC systems on a Likert scale from 1 (very unsuitable) to 7 (very suitable) alongside a discrete choice experiment. The survey was administered online to 155 AAC professionals in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Statistical modeling was used to estimate how suitable 274 hypothetical AAC systems were for each of 36 child vignettes. The proportion of AAC systems rated at least 5 out of 7 for suitability varied from 51.1% to 98.5% for different child vignettes. Only 12 out of 36 child vignettes had any AAC systems rated at least 6 out of 7 for suitability. The features of the most suitable AAC system depended on the characteristics of the child vignette. The results show that, while every child vignette had several systems that had a good suitability rating, there were variations, that could potentially lead to inequalities in provision.
期刊介绍：
As the official journal of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (ISAAC), Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) publishes scientific articles related to the field of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) that report research concerning assessment, treatment, rehabilitation, and education of people who use or have the potential to use AAC systems; or that discuss theory, technology, and systems development relevant to AAC. The broad range of topic included in the Journal reflects the development of this field internationally. Manuscripts submitted to AAC should fall within one of the following categories, AND MUST COMPLY with associated page maximums listed on page 3 of the Manuscript Preparation Guide.
Research articles (full peer review), These manuscripts report the results of original empirical research, including studies using qualitative and quantitative methodologies, with both group and single-case experimental research designs (e.g, Binger et al., 2008; Petroi et al., 2014).
Technical, research, and intervention notes (full peer review): These are brief manuscripts that address methodological, statistical, technical, or clinical issues or innovations that are of relevance to the AAC community and are designed to bring the research community’s attention to areas that have been minimally or poorly researched in the past (e.g., research note: Thunberg et al., 2016; intervention notes: Laubscher et al., 2019).
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
