Non-electronic communication aids for people with complex communication needs

References

• Angelo, D. (2000). Impact of augmentative and alternative communication devices on families. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 37–47.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, R. L., Parette, H. P., Jr., Stoner, J. B., Angell, M. E., Carroll, K. (2006). Family members' perceptions of augmentative and alternative communication device use. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 37, 50–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balandin, S., Iacono, T. (1998). AAC and Australian speech pathologists: Results of a national survey. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 239–249.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, A. R., Fritz, H., Keller, A., Dennis, M. (2000). Attitudes to school-aged children toward their peers who use augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 239–249.
   Google Scholar
• Beukelman, D., Mirenda, P. (2005). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Blackstone, S. (2006a). Funding around the world. Augmentative Communication News, 18, 7–8.
   Google Scholar
• Blackstone, S. (2006b). Ten US funding programs. Augmentative Communication News, 18, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Bloomberg, K., West, D., Iacono, T. (2003). PICTURE IT: An evaluation of a training program for carers of adults with severe and multiple disabilities. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 28, 260–282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloomberg, K., West, D., Johnson, H. (2004). InterAACtion: Strategies for intentional and unintentional communicators. Melbourne: Scope.
   Google Scholar
• Cumley, G., Swanson, S. (1999). Augmentative and alternative communication options for children with developmental apraxia of speech: Three case studies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 110–125.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Human Services (2007). Review of the Aids and Equipment Program. Retrieved 24 October, 2008 from http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/disability/supports_for_people/living_in_my_home/aids_and_equipment_program/whats_new.
   Google Scholar
• Donovan, N., Rosenbek, J., Ketterson, T., Velozo, C. (2006). Adding meaning to measurement: Initial rasch analysis of the ASHA FACS social communication subtest. Aphasiology, 20, 362–373.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doyle, M., Phillips, B. (2001). Trends in augmentative and alternative communication use by individuals with amyotropic lateral sclerosis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 17, 167–178.
   Google Scholar
• Fager, S., Hux, K., Beukelman, D., Karantounis, R. (2006). Augmentative and alternative communication use and acceptance by adults with traumatic brain injury. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 37–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frattali, C. (1998). Outcomes measurement: definitions, dimensions, and perspectives. In C. Frattali (Ed.), Measuring outcomes in speech-language pathology ( pp. 1–27). New York: Thieme.
   Google Scholar
• Frattali, C., Thompson, C., Holland, A., Wohl, C., Ferketic, M. (1995). Functional assessment of communication skills for adults. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language Hearing Association.
   Google Scholar
• Goldbart, J., Marshall, J. (2004). “Pushes and pulls” on the parents of children who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 194–208.
   Google Scholar
• Gorenflo, C., Gorenflo, D., Santer, S. (1994). Effects of synthetic voice output on attitudes toward the augmented communicator. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 64–68.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hodge, S. (2007). Why is the potential of augmentative and alternative communication not being realized? Exploring the experiences of people who use communication aids. Disability & Society, 22, 457–471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huer, M. B., Parette, H. P., Jr., Saenz, T. I. (2001). Conversations with Mexican Americans regarding children with disabilities and augmentative and alternative communication. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 22, 197–206.
   Google Scholar
• Iacono, T. (2004). The evidence base in augmentative and alternative communication. In S. Reilly, A. Perry, J. Douglas (Eds.), Evidence-based practice in speech pathology ( pp. 288–313). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Iacono, T., Johnson, H., Humphreys, J., Iacono, T., McAllister, L. (2007). Recruitment of speech pathologists into positions considered less attractive. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Iacono, T., Caithness, T. (2009). Assessment issues. In P. , Mirenda, T. Iacono (Eds.), Autism and augmentative and alternative communication ( pp. 23–48). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Iacono, T., Cameron, M. (2009). Australian speech-language pathologists' perceptions and experiences of augmentative and alternative communication in early childhood intervention. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 25, 236–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iacono, T., West, D., Bloomberg, K., Johnson, H. (2009). Reliability and validity of the revised triple C: checklist of communicative competencies for adults with severe and multiple disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 53, 44–53.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, B., Drew, R., Ogletree, B., Pierce, K. (2004). Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) for adults with severe aphasia: Where we stand and how we can go further. Disability and Rehabilitation: An International, Multidisciplinary Journal, 26, 1231–1240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, H., Douglas, J., Bigby, C., Iacono, T. (2009). Maximising community inclusion through mainstream communication services for adults with severe disabilities. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 180–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KPMG (2007). Final Report of the Aids and Equipment Program. Retrieved 24 October, 2008, http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/disability/supports_for_people/living_in_my_home/aids_and_equipment_program/whats_new.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J. C., Roberts, B., Dimarco, R., Greiner, N. (1998). Augmentative and alternative communication to support receptive and expressive communication for people with autism. Journal of Communication Disorders, 31, 153–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund, S. K., Light, J. (2006). Long-term outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Part I–What is a “good” outcome? Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 284–299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund, S. K., Light, J. (2007). Long-term outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Part II - communicative interaction. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 1–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCall, F., Markova, I., Murphy, J., Moodie, E., Collins, S. (1997). Perspectives on AAC systems by the users and their communication partners. European Journal of Disorders of Communication, 32, 235–256.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McCord, M., Soto, G. (2004). Perceptions of AAC: an ethnographic investigation of Mexican-American families. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 141–151.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, R., Harris, E., Price, K., Price, K., Jolleff, N. (2008). Elation or frustration? Outcomes following the provision of equipment during the Communication Aids Project: data from one CAP partner centre. Child: Care, Health and Development, 34, 223–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P. (2001). Autism, augmentative communication, and assistive technology: what do we really know? Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16, 141–151.
   Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P. (2003). Toward a functional augmentative and alternative communication for students with autism: Manual signs, graphic symbols, and voice output communication aids. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 34, 203–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P., Brown, K. (2009). A picture is worth a thousand words: using visual supports for augmented input with individuals with autism. In P. Mirenda, T. Iacono (Eds.), Autism and AAC. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, J. (2004). “I Prefer Contact This Close”: Perceptions of AAC by people with motor neurone disease and their communication partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 259–271.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, J., Markova, I., Collins, S., Moodie, E. (1996). AAC systems: obstacles to effective use. European Journal of Disorders of Communication, 31, 31–44.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Murphy, J., Markova, I., Moodie, E., Scott, J., Boa, S. (1995). Augmentative and alternative communication systems used by people with cerebral palsy in Scotland: Demographic survey. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 26–36.
   Google Scholar
• PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2007). Review of the program of appliances for disabled people. Retrieved 28 October, 2008 from http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/pubs/2006/program_of_appliance.html.
   Google Scholar
• Rackensperger, T., Krezman, C., McNaughton, D., Williams, M.B., D'Silva, K. (2005). “When I first got it, I wanted to throw it off a cliff”: The challenges and benefits of learning AAC technologies as described by adults who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 165–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell, A., McAllister, S. (1995). Use of AAC by individuals with acquired neurologic communication disabilities: Results of an Australian survey. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 138–146.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. (1999a). Comparative efficacy of interventions in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 56–68.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. (1999b). Social validation of interventions in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 234–247.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R., Lee, D. (2000). Promoting generalization and maintenance in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 208–226.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R., Sigafoos, J., Koul, R. (2008). Speech output and speech-generating devices in autism spectrum disorders. In P. , Mirenda, T. Iacono (Eds.), Autism and augmentative and alternative communication ( pp. 141–170). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., Raghavendra, P. (2004). Evidence-based practice in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Scope (2006). Too little too late: Wait times and cost burden for people with a disability in seeking equipment funding in Victoria. Melbourne: Scope (Vic).
   Google Scholar
• Shannon, M. S., Soto, G. (2004). Perceptions of AAC: an ethnographic investigation of Mexican-American families. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 209–227.
   Google Scholar
• Sigafoos, J., Drasgow, E. (2001). Conditional use of aided and unaided AAC. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16, 152–161.
   Google Scholar
• Soto, G., Muller, E., Hunt, P., Goetz, L. (2001). Professional skills for serving students who use AAC in general education classrooms: a team perspective. Language, Speech, & Hearing Services in the Schools, 32, 51–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutherland, D., Gillon, G., Yoder, D. (2005). AAC use and service provision: A survey of New Zealand speech-language therapists. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 295–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Threats, T. (2008). The use of the ICF for clinical practice in speech-language pathology. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 10, 50–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, B. T., Jackson, H. M. (2006). Developmental memory capacity resources of typical children retrieving picture communication symbols using direct selection and visual linear scanning with fixed communication displays. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wendt, O. (2009). Research on the use of manual signs and graphic symbols in autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review. In P. Mirenda, T. Iacono (Eds.), Autism and augmentative and alternative communication ( pp. 83–140). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization (2001). The international classification of functioning, disability and health – ICF. Albany, NY: World Health Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Worrall, L., Hickson, L. (2008). The use of the ICF in speech-language pathology research: Towards a research agenda. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 10, 72–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worrall, L., McCooey, R., Davidson, B., Larkins, B., Hickson, L. (2002). The validity of functional assessments of communication and the Activity/Participation components of the ICIDH-2: Do they reflect what really happens in real life? Journal of Communication Disorders, 35, 107–137.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worrall, L., McCooey, R., Davidson, B., Larkins, B., Hickson, L. (2008). Activity/Participation components of the ICIDH-2: Do they reflect what really happens in real life? Journal of Communication Disorders, 35, 107–137.
   Google Scholar
• Zangari, C., Lloyd, L. L., Vicker, B. (1994). Augmentative and alternative communication: An historic perspective. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 27–59.
   Google Scholar