Methodological advances, opportunities, and challenges in AAC research

References

• Agius, M.M., & Vance, M. (2016). A comparison of PECS and iPad© to teach requesting to preschoolers with autistic spectrum disorders. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 58–68. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2015.1108363
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almirall, D., Di Stefano, C., Chang, Y.-C., Shire, S., Kaiser, A., Lu, X., … Kasari, C. (2016). Longitudinal effects of adaptive interventions with a speech-generating device in minimally verbal children with ASD. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 44, 442–456. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2016.1138407
   Google Scholar
• Andzik, N.R., Chung, Y.-C., & Kranak, M.P. (2016). Communication opportunities for elementary school students who use augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 272–281. doi: 10.1080/07434618.2016.1241299
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. (1989). Finding the bloody horse. In L. W. Poon, D. C. Rubin & B. A. Wilson (Eds.), Everyday Cognition in Adulthood and Late Life (pp. 104–115). New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Balandin, S., & Goldbart, J. (2011). Qualitative research and AAC: Strong methods and new topics. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27, 227–228. doi:10.3109/07434618.2011.630409
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batorowicz, B., Stadskleiv, K., Von Tetzchner, S., & Missiuna, C. (2016). Children who use communication aids instructing peer and adult partners during play-based activity. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 105–119. doi:10.3109/07434618.2016.1160150
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauer, M.S., Damschroder, L., Hagedorn, H., Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A.M. (2015). An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC Psychology, 3, 1–12. doi:10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Beukelman, D., Yorkston, K., & Smith, K. (1985). Third-party payer response to requests for purchase of communication augmentation systems: A study of Washington State. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 5–9. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273471
   Google Scholar
• Binger, C., & Kent-Walsh, J. (2017). Word by word: Building Sentences with preschoolers who use AAC: 1R01DC016321-01. Retrieved from https://projectreporter.nih.gov/project_info_description.cfm?aid=9367698&icde =36436598
   Google Scholar
• Binger, C., Kent-Walsh, J., & King, M. (2017). Dynamic assessment for three- and four-year old children who use augmentative and alternative communication: Evaluating expressive syntax. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60, 1946–1958. doi:10.1044/2017_JSLHR-L-15-0269
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binger, C., Kent-Walsh, J., King, M., & Mansfield, L. (2017). Early sentence productions of three-and four-year-old children who use augmentative and alternative communication. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60, 1930–1945. doi:10.1044/2017_JSLHR-L-15-0408
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrelli, B. (2011). The assessment, monitoring, and enhancement of treatment fidelity in public health clinical trials. Journal of Public Health Dentistry, 71, 1–21. doi:10.1111/j.1752-7325.2011.00233.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caron, J., & Light, J. (2016). “Social media has opened a world of ‘open communication:’” Experiences of adults with cerebral palsy who use augmentative and alternative communication and social media. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 25–40. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2015.1052887
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caron, J., Light, J., & Drager, K. (2016). Operational demands of AAC mobile technology applications on programming vocabulary and engagement during professional and child interactions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 12–24. doi:10.3109/07434618.2015.1126636
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, Y.-C., & Stoner, J.B. (2016). A meta-synthesis of team members’ voices: What we need and what we do to support students who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 175–186. doi: 1080/07434618.2016.1213766
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cler, M.J., Nieto-Castañón, A., Guenther, F.H., Fager, S.K., & Stepp, C.E. (2016). Surface electromyographic control of a novel phonemic interface for speech synthesis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 120–130. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2016.1170205
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dada, S., Horn, T., Samuels, A., & Schlosser, R.W. (2016). Children’s attitudes toward interaction with an unfamiliar peer with complex communication needs: Comparing high- and low-technology devices. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 305–311. doi: 10.1080/07434618.2016.1216597
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Knegt, N.C., Lobbezoo, F., Schuengel, C., Evenhuis, H.M., & Scherder, E.J.A. (2016). Self-reporting tool on pain in people with intellectual disabilities (STOP-ID!): A usability study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 1–11. doi:10.3109/07434618.2015.1100677
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillman, D., Smyth, J., & Christian, L. (2014). Internet, Mail, and Mixed-mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
   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. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273601
   Google Scholar
• Doherty, J., Daniloff, J.K., & Lloyd, L. (1985). The effect of categorical presentation on Amer-Ind transparency. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 10–16. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273481
   Google Scholar
• Dukhovny, E., & Zhou, Y. (2016). Effects of icon size and location on speed and accuracy of SGD access. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 241–248. doi:10.1080/07434618.2016.1236835
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Equator Network. (2017). Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research. Retrieved October 11, 2017 from http://www.equator-network.org/
   Google Scholar
• Erickson, K., & Geist, L. (2016). The profiles of students with significant cognitive disabilities and complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 187–197. doi:10.1080/07434618.2016.1213312
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erwin, E.J., Brotherson, M.J., & Summers, J.A. (2011). Understanding qualitative metasynthesis. Journal of Early Intervention, 33, 186–200. doi:10.1177/1053815111425493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishman, S., Timler, G., & Yoder, D. (1985). Strategies for the prevention and repair of communication breakdown in interactions with communication board users. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 38–51. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273511
   Google Scholar
• Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Friedman, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida.
   Google Scholar
• Gast, D., & Ledford, J. (2014). Single Case Research Methodology: Applications in Special Education and Behavioral Sciences. New York, NY: Routledge Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Glennen, S.L., & Calculator, S.N. (1985). Training functional communication board use: A pragmatic approach. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 134–142. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273631
   Google Scholar
• Goossens, C. (1989). Aided communication intervention before assessment: A case study of a child with cerebral palsy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 14–26. doi:10.1080/07434618912331274926
   Google Scholar
• Grimes, D.A., & Schulz, K.F. (2002). An overview of clinical research: The lay of the land. Lancet, 359, 57–61. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07283-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hajjar, D.J., McCarthy, J.W., Benigno, J.P., & Chabot, J. (2016). “You get more than you give”: Experiences of community partners in facilitating active recreation with individuals who have complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 132–142. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2015.1136686
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyvaert, M., Wendt, O., Van den Noortgate, W., & Onghena, P. (2015). Randomization and data-analysis items in quality standards for single-case experimental studies. The Journal of Special Education, 49, 146–156. doi:10.1177/0022466914525239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinckley, J.J., & Douglas, N.F. (2013). Treatment fidelity: Its importance and reported frequency in aphasia treatment studies. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 22, S279–S284. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2012/12-0092)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyppa-Martin, J., Collins, D., Chen, M., Amundson, C., Timinski, K., & Mizuko, M. (2016). Comparing first graders’ attitudes and preferences toward a peer using an iPad© -based speech-generating device and a non-electronic AAC system. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 94–104. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2016.1146332
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, E., Bornman, J., & Tönsing, K.M. (2016). An exploration of pain-related vocabulary: Implications for AAC use with children. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 249–260. doi: 10.1080/07434618.2016.1233998
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasari, C., Kaiser, A., Goods, K., Nietfeld, J., Mathy, P., Landa, R., … Almirall, D. (2014). Communication interventions for minimally verbal children with autism: A sequential multiple assignment randomized trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 53, 635–646. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2014.01.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., Murza, K.A., Malani, M.D., & Binger, C. (2015). Effects of communication partner instruction on the communication of individuals using AAC: A meta-analysis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 31, 271–284. doi:10.3109/07434618.2015.1052153
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klang, N., Rowland, C., Fried-Oken, M., Steiner, S., Granlund, M., & Adolfsson, M. (2016). The content of goals in individual educational programs for students with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 41–48. doi:10.3109/07434618.2015.1134654
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kratochwill, T.R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R.H., Levin, J.R., Odom, S.L., Rindskopf, D.M., & Shadish, W.R. (2010). Single-case design technical documentation. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwc_scd.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Light, J. (1999). Do AAC interventions really make a difference?: The challenges of efficacy research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 13–24. doi:10.1080/07434619912331278535
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985a). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part I—Discourse patterns. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 74–83. doi: 10.1080/07434618512331273561
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985b). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary care givers: Part II–Communicative function. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 98–107. doi: 10.1080/07434618512331273591
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985c). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part III–Modes of communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 125–133. doi: 10.1080/07434618512331273621
   Google Scholar
• Luftig, R., & Bersani, H. (1985). An investigation of two variables influencing Blissymbol learnability with nonhandicapped adults. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 32–37. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273501
   Google Scholar
• Medeiros, K.F., & Cress, C.J. (2016). Differences in maternal responsive and directive behavior during free play with and without aided AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 151–161. doi:10.1080/07434618.2016.1179341
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros, K.F., Cress, C.J., & Lambert, M.C. (2016). Mastery motivation in children with complex communication needs: Longitudinal data analysis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 208–218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P. (1985). Designing pictorial communication systems for physically able-bodied students with severe handicaps. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 58–64. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273541
   Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P. (2014). Comments and a personal reflection on the persistence of facilitated communication. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 8, 102–110. doi:10.1080/17489539.2014.997427
   Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P., & Santogrossi, J. (1985). A prompt-free strategy to teach pictorial communication system use. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 143–150. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273641
   Google Scholar
• Mobasheri, M.H., King, D., Judge, S., Arshad, F., Larsen, M., Safarfashandi, Z., … Darzi, A. (2016). Communication aid requirements of intensive care unit patients with transient speech loss. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 261–271. doi: 10.1080/07434618.2016.1235610
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institutes of Health (NIH). (2016). HHS takes steps to provide more information about clinical trials to the public. Retrieved from https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/hhs-takes-steps-provide-more-information-about-clinical-trials-public
   Google Scholar
• National Institutes of Health (NIH). (2017). Implementation science information and resources. Retrieved from https://www.fic.nih.gov/researchtopics/pages/implementationscience.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Olswang, L.B., & Prelock, P. (2015). Bridging the gap between research and practice: Implementation science. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 58, S181–S1826. doi:10.1044/2015_JSLHR-L-14-0305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, J.D., Hudspeth Dalton, S.G., Shafer, J., & Patterson, J. (2016). Assessment fidelity in aphasia research. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 25, S788–S797. doi:10.1044/2016_AJSLP-15-0146
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romski, M., Sevcik, R.A., Adamson, L.B., Smith, A., & Barker, R.M. (2010). Randomized comparison of augmented and nonaugmented language interventions for toddlers with developmental delays and their parents. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 53, 350–365. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0156)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R.W. (2007). Appraising the quality of systematic reviews. Focus Technical Brief: A Publication of the National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research, 17.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. (2016). Evidence for impact and impact of evidence. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 227–232. doi:10.1080/07434618.2016.1250283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Springer. (2017). Study Protocols. Retrieved October 11, 2017, from https://springerplus.springeropen.com/submission-guidelines/preparing-your-manuscript/study-protocols
   Google Scholar
• Stephenson, J. (2016). Using the Choiceboard CreatorTM app on an iPad© to teach choice making to a student with severe disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 49–57. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2015.1136688
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate, R.L., Perdices, M., Rosenkoetter, U., Shadish, W., Vohra, S., Barlow, D.H., … Cen, J.W. (2016). The Single-Case Reporting guidelines In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 statement. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 4, 1–9. doi: 10.1037/arc0000026
   Google Scholar
• Tetzlaff, J.M., Chan, A., Kitchen, J., Sampson, M., Tricco, A.C., & Moher, D. (2012). Guidelines for randomized clinical trial protocol content: A systematic review. Systematic Reviews, 1, 1–11. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Therrien, M.C.S., & Light, J. (2016). Using the iPad© to facilitate interaction between preschool children who use AAC and their peers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 163–174. doi: 10.1080/07434618.2016.1205133
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Therrien, M.C.S., Light, J., & Pope, L. (2016). Systematic review of the effects of interventions to promote peer interactions for children who use aided AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 81–93. doi:10.3109/07434618.2016.1146331
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tönsing, K.M., & Dada, S. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions of implementation of aided AAC to support expressive communication in South African special schools: A pilot investigation. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 282–304. doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2016.1223837
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, V.L., & Snell, M.E. (2013). Effects of augmentative and alternative communication on challenging behavior: A meta-analysis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 117–131. doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.785020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, C., Appleget, A., & Hart, S. (2016). Core vocabulary in written personal narratives of school-age children. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32, 198–207. doi:10.1080/07434618.2016.1216596
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoder, D.E. (1985). Editorial. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 1. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273451
   Google Scholar
• Yoder, P., & Stone, W.L.W. (2006). A randomized comparison of the effect of two prelinguistic communication interventions on the acquisition of spoken communication in preschoolers with ASD. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 49, 698–711. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2006/051)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar