Evidence-Based Practice in Augmentative and Alternative Communication

References

• Alpert, C. (1980). Procedures for determining the optimal nonspeech mode with the autistic child. In R. L. Schiefelbusch (Ed.), Nonspeech language and communica-tion: Analysis and intervention (pp. 394–420). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2002, April 16). Augmentative and alternative communication: Knowledge and skills for service delivery. ASHA Leader, 7\(Suppl. 22), 97–106.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, R. P., & Sisson, L. A. (1987). Use of the alternating treatments design as a strategy for empirically determin-ing language training approaches with mentally retarded children. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 8, 401 — 412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett, D. L., Gast, D. L., Wolery, M., & Schuster, J. (1986). Time delay and system of least prompts: A comparison in teaching manual sign production. Educa-tion and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 21, 117— 129.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, J. W., & Glasziou, P. (1997). Evidence-based practice. What does it really mean? Disease Management Health Outcomes, 1, 277–285.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, K. L., Sackett, D. L., Haynes, R. B., Neufeld, V. R., Tugwell, P., & Roberts, R. (1987). A controlled trial of teaching critical appraisal of the clinical literature to medical students. Journal of the American Medical Association, 257, 2451 — 2454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett, S., & Bennett, J. W. (2000). The process of evidence-based practice in occupational therapy: Inform-ing clinical decisions. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 47, 171–180.
   Google Scholar
• Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court.
   Google Scholar
• Bessell, T. L., McDonald, S., Silagy, C. A., Anderson, J. N., Hiller, J. E., & Sansom, L. N. (2002). Do Internet interventions for consumers cause more harm than good? A systematic review. Health Expect, 5, 28–37.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (1998). Augmentative and alternative communication: Management of severe com-munication disorders in children and adults (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Biermann, A. (1999). Gestatzte Kommunikation im Wide-rstreit. Berlin, Germany: Edition Marhold im Wis-senschaftsverlag Volker Spiess GmbH.
   Google Scholar
• Bligh, S., & Kupperman, P. (1993). Evaluation procedure for determining the source of the communication in facili-tated communication accepted in a court case. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 23, 553–557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blischak, D. M. (1999). Increases in natural speech produc-tion following experience with synthetic speech. Journal of Special Education Technology, 14, 47–57.
   Google Scholar
• Blischak, D. M. (1995). Thomas the writer: Case study of a child with severe physical, speech, and visual impair-ments. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 26, 11–20.
   Google Scholar
• Calculator, S. N., & Jorgensen, C. M. (1994). Including students with severe disabilities in schools: Fostering communication, interaction, and participation. San Diego: Singular.
   Google Scholar
• Carr, A. (2000). Evidence-based practice in family therapy and systemic consultation: I Child-focused problems. Journal of Family Therapy, 22, 29–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carr, E., & Dores, P. (1981). Patterns of language acquisi-tion following simultaneous communication with autistic children. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1,1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, S., Remington, B., & Light, P. (1988). The role of referential speech in sign learning by mentally retarded children: A comparison of total communication and sign-alone training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 419–426.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, S., Remington, B., & Light, P. (1986). An evaluation of the relationship between receptive speech skills and expressive signing. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 231–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conaghan, B. P., Singh, N., Moe, T. L., Landrum, T. J., & Ellis, C. R. (1992). Aquisition and generalization of manual signs by hearing-impaired adults with mental retardation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2,177–205.
   Google Scholar
• DeJong, G. (1999). Toward an evidence-based rehabilitation culture. Rehabilitation Outlook, 4, 10–11.
   Google Scholar
• De Vet, C. W. H., de Bie, R., van der Heijden, G., Verhagen, A., Sijpkes, P., & Knipschild, P. (1997). Systematic reviews on the basis of methodological criteria. Phy-siotherapy, 83, 284–289.
   Google Scholar
• DiCarlo, C., Stricklin, S., Banajee, M., & Reid, D. (2002). Effects of manual signing on communicative verbaliza-tions by toddlers with and without disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26, 1201–1226.
   Google Scholar
• Dodgen, D. (1996). AAC feature match software. Arlington, TX: Doug Dodgen & Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Doherty, J. (1985). The effects of sign characteristics on sign acquisition and retention: An integrative review of the literature: Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1,108–121.
   Google Scholar
• Dowden, P., Beukelman, D. R., & Lossing, C. (1986). Serving nonspeaking patients in acute care settings: Intervention outcomes. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2, 38–44.
   Google Scholar
• Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Deal, A. G. (1994). Supporting and strengthening families (Vold): Methods, strategics and practices. Cambridge, MA:Brookline Books.
   Google Scholar
• Durand, V. M. (1990). Severe behavior problems. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Earl-Slater, A. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of evidence from clinical trials. British Journal of Clinical Governance, 6, 136–139.
   Google Scholar
• Fried-Oken, M., & Bersani, H. A. (2000). Speaking up and spelling it out. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, D. R., & Lloyd, L. L. (1992). Effects of configuration on the paired-associate learning of Blissymbols by preschool children with normal cognitive abilities. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 1376–1383.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glennen, S. L., & Calculator, S. N. (1985). Training functional communication board use: A pragmatic approach. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 134–142.
   Google Scholar
• Glennen, S. L., & DeCoste, D. (1997). The handbook of augmentative and alternative communication. San Diego, CA: Singular.
   Google Scholar
• Golper, L. A., Wertz, R. T., Frattali, C. M., Yorkston, K., Meyers, P., Katz, R., Beeson, P., Kennedy, M. R. T., Bayles, K., & Wambaugh, J. (2001). Evidence-based practice guidelines for the management of communication disorders in neurologically impaired individuals: Project introduction. Minneapolis, MN: Academy of Neurologic Communication Disorders and Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes-Roth, R., Waterman, D. A., & Lenat, D. L. (1984). Building expert systems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Heater, B. S., Becker, A. M., & Olson, R. (1988). Nursing interventions and patient outcomes: A meta-analysis of studies. Nursing Research, 37, 303–307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helewa, A., & Walker, J. M. (2000). Critical evaluation of research in physical rehabilitation: Towards evidence-based practices. Philadelphia: WB. Saunders Company.
   Google Scholar
• Hoagwood, K., Burns, B. J., Kiser, L., Ringeisen, H., & Schoenwald, S. K. (2001). Evidence-based practice in child and adolescent mental health services. Psychiatric Services, 52, 1179–1189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphris, D., Littlejohns, P., Victor, C., O'Halloran, P., & Peacock, J. (2000). Implementing evidence-based prac-tice: Factors that influence the use of research evidence by Occupational Therapists. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63, 516–522.
   Google Scholar
• Hunsley, J., Dobson, K. S., Johnston, C., & Mikail, S. F. (1999). Empirically supported treatments in psychology: Implications for Canadian professional psychology. Canadian Psychology, 40, 289–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hupp, S. C., & Mervis, C. B. (1981). Development of generalized concepts by severely handicapped students. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handi-caps, 6, 14–21.
   Google Scholar
• Iacono, T. (in press). The evidence base in augmentative and alternative communication. In S. Reilly, A. Perry, & J. Douglas (Eds.), Evidence-Based Practice in Speech Pathology. London, UK: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, G. B. (1980). Methods for integrative reviews. Review of Educational Research, 50, 438–460.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobson, J. W., Mulick, J. A., & Schwartz, A. A. (1995). A history of facilitated communication. American Psychol-ogist, 50, 750–765.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koul, R., Schlosser, R. W., Corwin, M., & Sims, S. (1997, November). Effects of speech output on graphic symbol learning. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Speech-Language and Hearing Association, Boston.
   Google Scholar
• Kouri, T. A. (1988). Effects of simultaneous communication in a child-directed treatment approach with preschoolers with severe disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 4, 222–232.
   Google Scholar
• Law, M., & Baum, C. (1998). Evidence-based occupational therapy. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65, 131–135.
   Google Scholar
• Layton, T. (1988). Language training with autistic children using four different modes of presentations. Journal of Communication Disorders, 21, 333–350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, S. P., Gauger, J. R. D., Bowers, L. D., & Khan, K. J. (1986). A comparison of mouthstick and morse code text inputs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2, 51–55.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., & Binger, C. (1998). Building communicative competence with individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Linton, J. M., & Singh, N. N. (1984). Acquisition of sign language using positive practice over-correction. Behavior Modification, 8, 553–566.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloyd, L. L., Fuller, D. R., & Arvidson, H. (1997). Augmentative and alternative communication: A hand-book of principles and practices. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd-Smith, W. (1997). Evidence-based practice and occupational therapy. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60, 474–478.
   Google Scholar
• Locke, P. A., & Mirenda, P. (1992). Roles and responsi-bilities of special education teachers serving on teams delivering AAC services. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 200–214.
   Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, E., King, G., Cathers, T., Scott, J. (1995). Electronic mail: Service from afar for individuals with physical disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Com-munication, 11, 236–243.
   Google Scholar
• Millar, D. C., Light, J. C., & Schlosser, R. W. (2003). The impact of augmentative and alternative communication on natural speech development: A research review. Manu-script in preparation.
   Google Scholar
• Millar, D., Light, J., & Schlosser, R. (2000). The impact of AAC on natural speech development: A meta-analysis. In Proceedings of the 9th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (pp. 740–741). Washington, DC: ISAAC.
   Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P. (1997). Supporting individuals with challenging behavior through functional communication training and AAC: A research review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 207–225.
   Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P., & Beukelman, D. R. (1987). A comparison of speech synthesis intelligibility with listeners from three age groups. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 120–128.
   Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P., Wilk, D., & Carson, P. (2000). A retrospective analysis of technology use patterns in students with autism over a five-year period. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15, 5–16.
   Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P. (2003). Toward functional augmentative and alternative communication for students with autism: Manual signs, graphic symbols, and voice output com-munication aids. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 34, 203–216
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, G. J. (1999). Evidence-based practice: Critique and alternative view. Nursing Science Quarterly, 12, 30–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mizuko, M. (1987). Transparency and ease of learning of symbols represented by Blissymbols, PCS, and Picsyms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 129–136.
   Google Scholar
• Nagy, C. (2001). 10 Jahre FC in Deutschland. Autismus, 51, 57–59.
   Google Scholar
• Napper, S. A., Robey, B. L., & McAffee, P. H. (1989). An expert system for use in the prescription of electronic augmentative and alternative communication devices. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 128–136.
   Google Scholar
• Nutbeam, D. (1996). Improving the fit between research and practice in health promotion: Overcoming structural barriers. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 87, 18–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olson, E. A. (1996). Evidence-based practice: A new approach to teaching the integration of research and practice in gerontology. Educational Gerontology, 22, 523–537.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owens, R., & House, L. (1984). Decsion-making processes in augmentative and alternative communication. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 18–25.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Parsons, C. L., & La Sorte, D. (1993). The effect of computers with synthesized speech and no speech on the spontaneous communication of children with autism. Australian Journal of Human Communication Disorders, 21, 12–31.
   Google Scholar
• Raghavendra, P. (2000). Evidence-based practice: Where are we in AAC?. Proceedings of the 9th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (pp. 742–743). Washington DC: ISSAC.
   Google Scholar
• Reichle, J. (1991). Defining the decisions involved in designing and implementing augmentative and alternative communication systems. In J. Reichle, J. York, & J. Sigafoos (Eds.), Implementing augmentative and alterna-tive communication: Strategies for learners with severe disabilities (pp. 39–60). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Reichle, J., & Karlan, G. (1988). Selecting augmentative communication interventions: A critique of candidacy criteria and a proposed alternative. In R. L. Schiefel-busch, & L. L. Lloyd (Eds.), Language perspectives: Acquisition, retardation, and intervention (pp. 321–339). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
   Google Scholar
• Reichle, J., & Karlan, G. (1985). The selection of an augmentative system of communication intervention: A critique of decision rules. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 10, 146–159.
   Google Scholar
• Reid, D. H., & Hurlbut, B. (1977). Teaching nonvocal communication skills to multihandicapped retarded adults. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 591–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Remington, B., & Clarke, S. (1993). Simultaneous commu-nication and speech comprehension. Part I: Comparison of two methods of teaching expressive signing and speech comprehension skills. Augmentative and Alternative Com-munication, 9, 36–48.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, W., Scott, M. D., Wilson, MC., Nishikawa, J., & Hayward, R. S. A. (1995). The well-built clinical question: A key to evidence-based decisions (Editorial). American College of Physicians Journal Club, 123, November -December, A–12.
   Google Scholar
• Romski, M. A., & Sevcik, R. A. (1992). Developing augmented language in children with severe mental retardation. In S. F. Warren & J. Reichle (Eds.), Causes and effects in communication and language intervention (pp. 113–131). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Rosen, A, & Teeson, M. (2001). Does case management work? The evidence and the abuse of evidence-based medicine. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Psychia-try, 35, 731–746.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, P., King, S., Law, M., King, G., & Evans, J. (1998). Family-centered service: A conceptual framework and research review. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 18, 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, W., & Donald, A. (1995). Evidence-based medicine: An approach to clinical problem solving. British Medical Journal, 310, 1122–1125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotholz, D. A., Berkowitz, S. F., & Burberry, J. (1989). Functionality of two modes of communication in the community by students with developmental disabilities: A comparison of signing and communication books. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handi-caps, 14, 227–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sackett, D. L., Richardson, W. S., Rosenberg, W., & Haynes, R. B. (1997). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM. New York: Churchill Living-stone.
   Google Scholar
• Schepis, M. M., Reid, D. H., Fitzgerald, J. R., Faw, G. D., Van Den Pol, R. A., & Welty, P. A. (1982). A program for increasing manual signing by autistic and profoundly retarded youth within the daily environment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 363–379.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W. (2003). The efficacy of augmentative and alternative communication: Toward evidence-based prac-tice. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W. (2002). On the importance of being earnest about treatment integrity. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 36–44.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W. (in press). Goal attainment scaling as a clinical measurement technique in comminication disorders: A critical review. Journal of Communication Disorders.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W. (1999a). Comparative efficacy of interven-tions in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 56–68.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W. (1999b). Social validation of interventions in augmentative and alternative communication. Aug-mentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 234–247.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., Belfiore, P. J., Nigam, R., Blischak, D., & Hetzroni, 0. (1995). The effects of speech output technology in the learning of graphic symbols. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 537–549.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., & Blischak, D. M. (2001). Is there a role for speech output in interventions for persons with autism? A review. Focus on Autism and Other Develop-mental Disabilities, 16, 170–178.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., Blischak, D. M., Belfiore, P. J., Bartley, C., & Barnett, N. (1998). The effects of synthetic speech output and orthographic feedback on spelling in a student with autism: A preliminary study. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 28, 319–329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., McGhie-Richmond, D., Blackstien-Adler, S., Mirenda, P., Antonius, K., & Janzen, P. (2000). Training a school team to integrate technology meaningfully into the curriculum: Effects on student participation. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15, 31–44.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., & Lee, D. (2000). Promoting generalization and maintenance in augmentative and alternative com-munication: A meta-analysis of 20 years of effectiveness research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 208–227.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., & Lloyd, L. L. (1993). Effects of initial element teaching in a story-telling context on Blissymbol acquisition and generalization. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 979–995.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., & Raghavendra, P. (2003). Towards evidence-based practice in augmentative and alternative communication. In R. W. Schlosser, The efficacy of augmentative and alternative communication: Towards evidence-based practice (pp. 259–297). New York: Aca-demic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., & Sigafoos, J. (2002). Selecting graphic symbols for an initial request lexicon: Integrative review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 102–123.
   Google Scholar
• Schweigert, P., & Rowland, C. (1992). Early communication and microtechnology: Instructional sequence and case studies of children with severe multiple disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 273–286.
   Google Scholar
• Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., Cook, S. B., & Escobar, C. (1986). Early intervention for children with conduct disorders: A quantitative synthesis of single-subject research. Behavioral Disorders, 11, 260–271.
   Google Scholar
• Sevcik, R. A., Romski, M. A., Watkins, R. V., & Deffebach, K. P. (1993). A descriptive analysis of augmented linguistic input to nonspeaking children with mental retardation. Unpublished manuscript, Georgia State University.
   Google Scholar
• Shane, H. C., & Bashir, A. S. (1980). Election criteria for the adoption of an augmentative communication system: Preliminary considerations. Journal of Speech and Hear-ing Disorders, 45, 408–414.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sigafoos, J., Drasgow, E., & Schlosser, R. W. (2003). Strategies for beginning communicators. In R. W. Schlosser (Ed.), The efficacy of augmentative and alter-native communication: Toward evidence-based practice. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sigafoos, J., & Iacono, T. (1993). Selecting augmentative communication devices for persons with severe disabil-ities: Some factors for educational teams to consider. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 18, 133–146.
   Google Scholar
• Sigafoos, J., Laurie, S., & Pennell, D. (1996). Teaching children with Rett Syndrome to request preferred objects using aided communication: Two preliminary studies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 88–96.
   Google Scholar
• Sisson, L. A., & Barrett, R. P. (1984). An alternating treatments comparison of oral and total communication training with minimally verbal, mentally retarded chil-dren. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 559–566.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanner, C. A. (1999). Evidence-based practice: Research and critical thinking. Journal of Nursing Education, 38, 99–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, C., & Dowling, D. (2001). Responding to uncertainty in nursing practice. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 38, 609–615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tickle-Degnen, L. (2000). Teaching evidence-based practice. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 54, 559–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaughn, B., & Homer, R. (1995). Effects of concrete versus verbal choice systems on problem behavior. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 89–92.
   Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S., & Martinsen, H. (1992). Introduction to symbolic and augmentative communication. London: Whurr Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Wheeler, D. L., Jacobson, J. W., Paglieri, R. A., & Schwartz, A. A. (1993). An experimental assessment of facilitated communication. Mental Retardation, 31, 49–60.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yoder, P., & Layton, T. (1988). Speech following sign language training in autistic children with minimal verbal language. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabil-ities, 18, 217–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• York, J., Nietupski, J., & Hamre-Nietupski, S. (1985). A decision-making process for using microswitches. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 10, 214–223.
   Google Scholar
• Yorkston, K. M., & Beukelman, D. R. (2000). Decision making in AAC intervention. In D. R. Beukelman, K. M. Yorkston, & J. Reichle (Eds.), Augmentative and alter-native communication for adults with acquired neurologic disorders (pp. 55–82). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Zarin, D. A., Seigle, L., Pincus, H. A., & McIntyre, J. S (1997). Evidence-based practice guidelines. Psychophar-macology Bulletin, 33, 641–646.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar