Toward greater involvement of youth with complex communication needs in the selection of augmentative and alternative communication devices

References

• Holyfield C, Drager KDR, Kremkow JMD, et al. Systematic review of AAC intervention research for adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder. Augment Altern Commun. 2017;33:201–212.
   Google Scholar
• Logan K, Iacono T, Trembath D. A systematic review of research into aided AAC to increase social-communication functions in children with autism spectrum disorder. Augment Altern Commun. 2017;33:51–64.
   Google Scholar
• Millar DC, Light JC, Schlosser RW. The impact of augmentative and alternative communication intervention on the speech production of individuals with developmental disabilities: a research review. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2006;49:248–264.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Canada. Use and need for assistive technology for children aged 5–14 with disabilities by disability type (2006). Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Dusing SC, Skinner AC, Mayer ML. Unmet need for therapy services, assistive devices, and related services: data from the national survey of children with special health care needs. Ambul Pediatr. 2004;4:448–454.
   Google Scholar
• Lindsay S, Tsybina L. Predictors of unmet needs for communication and mobility assistive devices among youth with a disability: the role of socio-cultural factors. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2011;6:10–21.
   Google Scholar
• Ganz JB, Earles-Vollrath TL, Heath AK, et al. A meta-analysis of single case research studies on aided augmentative and alternative communication systems with individuals with autism spectrum disorders. J Autism Dev Disord. 2012;42:60–74.
   Google Scholar
• Romski M, Sevcik RA, Adamson LB, et al. Randomized comparison of augmented and nonaugmented language interventions for toddlers with developmental delays and their parents. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010;53:350–364.
   Google Scholar
• Drager K, Light J, McNaughton D. Effects of AAC interventions on communication and language for young children with complex communication needs. J Pediatr Rehabil Med. 2010;3:303–310.
   Google Scholar
• Walker VL, Snell ME. Effects of augmentative and alternative communication on challenging behavior: a meta-analysis. Augment Altern Commun. Augment Altern Commun. 2013;29:117–131.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser RW, Wendt O. Effects of augmentative and alternative communication intervention on speech production in children with autism: a systematic review. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2008;17:212–230.
   Google Scholar
• Branson D, Demchak M. The use of augmentative and alternative communication methods with infants and toddlers with disabilities: a research review. Augment Alternat Commun. 2009;25:274–286.
   Google Scholar
• Light J, McNaughton D. Supporting the communication, language and literacy development of children with complex communication needs: state of the science and future research priorities. Assist Technol. 2011;24:34–44.
   Google Scholar
• Brumberg JS, Pitt KM, Mantie-Kozlowski A, et al. Brain-computer interfaces for augmentative and alternative communication: a tutorial. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018;27:1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Romski M, Sevcik RA, Barton-Hulsey A, et al. Early Intervention and AAC: what a difference 30 years makes. Augment Altern Commun. 2015;31:181–202.
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network Surveillance Year 2006. Prevalence of autism spectrum disorders – autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, United States, 2006. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2009;58:1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Vincer MJ, Allen AC, Joseph KS, et al. Increasing prevalence of cerebral palsy among very preterm infants: a population-based study. Pediatrics. 2006;118:1621–1626.
   Google Scholar
• Boster JB, McCarthy JW. Designing augmentative and alternative communication applications: the results of focus groups with speech-language pathologists and parents of children with autism spectrum disorder. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2018;13:353–365.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson J, Inglebret E, Jones C, et al. Perspectives of speech language pathologists regarding success versus abandonment of AAC. Augment Altern Commun. 2006;22:85–89.
   Google Scholar
• Calculator SN. Use and acceptance of AAC systems by children with Angelman Syndrome. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2013;26:557–567.
   Google Scholar
• Riemer-Reiss ML, Wacker RR. Factors associated with assistive technology discontinuance among individuals with disabilities. J Rehabil. 2003;66:44–50.
   Google Scholar
• Allsop MJ, Holt RJ, Levesley MC, et al. The engagement of children with disabilities in health-related technology design processes: identifying methodology. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2010;5:1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Light J, Page R, Curran J, et al. Children’s ideas for the design of AAC assistive technologies for young children with complex communication needs. Augment Altern Commun. 2007;23:274–287.
   Google Scholar
• Downey D, Hurtig R. Augmentative and alternative communication. Pediatr Ann. 2003;32:466–474.
   Google Scholar
• Moschis G, Churchill G. Consumer socialization: a theoretical and empirical analysis. J Marking Res. 1978;15:599–609.
   Google Scholar
• Scherer M, Jutai J, Fuhrer M, et al. A framework for modelling the selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs). Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2007;2:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan SE, Klejman S, Gibson BE. Measurement of the product attitudes of youth during the selection of assistive technology devices. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2013;8:21–29.
   Google Scholar
• Tam C, Archer J, Mays J, et al. Measuring the outcomes of word cueing technology. Can J Occup Ther. 2005;72:301–308.
   Google Scholar
• Huang I, Sugden D, Beveridge S. Children’s perceptions of their use of assistive devices in home and school settings. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2009;4:95–105.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke M, McConachie H, Price K, et al. Views of young people using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Int J Lang Comm Dis. 2001;36:107–115.
   Google Scholar
• Murchland S, Jocelyn Kernot J, Parkyn H. Children's satisfaction with assistive technology solutions for schoolwork using the QUEST 2.1: children's version. Assist Technol. 2011;23:162–176.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan SE, Redekop S, Barber A. Toward understanding the opinions of school-aged children about adaptive school chairs. Proceedings of the 22nd International Seating Symposium; 2004 Mar 2–4; Vancouver, BC.
   Google Scholar
• Redekop S, Holland A, Ryan SE. Reliability of a questionnaire to measure the attitudes of school-age children toward bicycle helmets. Paper presented at Bloorview Research Institute Symposium; 2008 Nov 18–19; Toronto, ON.
   Google Scholar
• Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–174.
   Google Scholar
• Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 5th ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Mellor D, Moore KA. The use of Likert scales with children. J Pediatr Psychol. 2014; 39:369–379.
   Google Scholar
• Chambers CT, Johnston C. Developmental differences in children's use of rating scales. J Pediatr Psychol. 2002;27:27–36.
   Google Scholar
• Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM. Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Delarosa L, Horner S, Eisenberg C, et al. Family impact of assistive technology scale: development of a measurement scale for parents of children with complex communication needs. Augment Altern Commun. 2012;28:171–180.
   Google Scholar
• Enderby P. Introducing the therapy outcome measure for AAC services in the context of a review of other measures. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9:33–40.
   Google Scholar
• Olkin I, Finn JD. Correlations redux. Psychol Bull. 1995;118:155–164.
   Google Scholar