Using physical objects with young children in ‘face-to-face’ and telehealth speech and language therapy

References

• Mashima PA, Doarn CR. Overview of telehealth activities in speech-language pathology. Telemed e-Health. 2008;14:1101–1117.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ruggero L, McCabe P, Ballard KJ, et al. Paediatric speech-language pathology service delivery: an exploratory survey of Australian parents. Int J Speech-Lang Pathol. 2012;14:338–350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards M, Stredler-Brown A, Houston KT. Expanding use of telepractice in speech-language pathology and audiology. Volta Rev. 2012;112:227–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson L, Lincoln M, Onslow M. Availability, access, and quality of care: inequities in rural speech pathology services for children and a model for redress. Adv Speech Lang Pathol. 2002;4:9–22.
   Google Scholar
• Hill AJ, Miller LE. A survey of the clinical use of telehealth in speech-language pathology across Australia. J Clin Pract Speech-Lang Pathol. 2012;14:110–117.
   Google Scholar
• Dunkley C, Pattie L, Wilson L, et al. A comparison of rural speech-language pathologists’ and residents’ access to and attitudes towards the use of technology for speech-language pathology service delivery. Int J Speech-Lang Pathol. 2010;12:333–343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theodoros D. Speech-language pathology and telerehabilitation. In: Kumar S, Cohn ER, editors. Telerehabilitation. Health informatics. London: Springer; 2013. p. 311–323.
   Google Scholar
• Bradford NK, Caffery LJ, Smith AC. Telehealth services in rural and remote Australia: a systematic review of models of care and factors influencing success and sustainability. Rural Rem Health. 2016;16:3808.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutherland R, Trembath D, Hodge A, et al. Telehealth language assessments using consumer grade equipment in rural and urban settings: feasible, reliable and well tolerated. J Telemed Telecare. 2016;23:106–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freckmann A, Hines M, Lincoln M. Clinicians’ perspectives of therapeutic alliance in face-to-face and telepractice speech-language pathology sessions. Int J Speech-Lang Pathol. 2017;19:287–296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hines M, Lincoln M, Ramsden R, et al. Speech pathologists’ perspectives on transitioning to telepractice: what factors promote acceptance? J Telemed Telecare. 2015;21:469–473.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armfield NR, Bradford M, Bradford NK. The clinical use of Skype: for which patients, with which problems and in which settings? A snapshot review of the literature. Int J Med Informat. 2015;84:737–742.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licoppe C, Morel J. Video-in-interaction: “Talking heads” and the multimodal organization of mobile and Skype video calls. Res Lang Soc Interact. 2012;45:399–429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roulstone S, Glogowska M, Peters TJ, et al. Building good practice: lessons from a multimethod study of speech and language therapy. Int J Ther Rehabil. 2004;11:199–205.
   Google Scholar
• Tykkyläinen T. Task-setting at home and in speech and language therapy. Child Lang Teach Ther. 2009;25:319–340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharp HM, Hillenbrand K. Speech and language development and disorders in children. Pediatr Clin N Am. 2008;55:1159–1173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iacono TA. Language intervention in early childhood. Int J Disabil Dev Educ. 1999;46:383–420.
   Google Scholar
• Heath C, Hindmarsh J. Configuring action in objects: from mutual space to media space. Mind Cult Activ. 2000;7:81–104.
   Google Scholar
• Drew P, Chatwin J, Collins S. Conversation analysis: a method for research into interactions between patients and health-care professionals. Health Expect. 2001;4:58–70.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bloch S. Anticipatory other-completion of augmentative and alternative communication talk: a conversation analysis study. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33:261–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denman A, Wilkinson R. Applying conversation analysis to traumatic brain injury: investigating touching another person in everyday social interaction. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33:243–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antaki C, Wilkinson R. Conversation analysis and the study of atypical populations. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2013. p. 533–550.
   Google Scholar
• Ronkainen RJ. Enhancing listening and imitation skills in children with cochlear implants: the use of multimodal resources in speech therapy. JIRCD. 2011;2:245–269.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer K, Tenbrink T. Video conferencing in a transregional research cooperation: turn-taking in a new medium. In: Döring J, Schmitz HW, Schulte OA, editors. Connecting perspectives: videokonferenz: beiträge zu ihrer erforschung und an wendung. Aachen (Germany): Shaker Verlag; 2003. p. 89–104.
   Google Scholar
• Rintel S. Video calling in long-distance relationships: the opportunistic use of audio/video distortions as a relational resource. Electron J Commun/La Rev Electron Commun. 2013;23:13.
   Google Scholar
• Liddicoat AJ. Enacting participation: hybrid modalities in on-line video conversation. In: Develotte C, Kern R, Lamy MN, editors. Décrire la conversation en ligne. Lyon (France): ENS Éditions; 2010. p. 37–50.
   Google Scholar
• Licoppe C, Dumoulin L. The “curious case” of an unspoken opening speech act: a video-ethnography of the use of video communication in courtroom activities. Res Lang Soc Interact. 2010;43:211–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rintel ES. Conversational management of network trouble perturbations in personal videoconferencing. Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group of Australia on Computer-Human Interaction; 2010. p. 1952288.
   Google Scholar
• Sidnell J. Basic conversation analytic methods. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013. p. 77–99.
   Google Scholar
• Stivers T, Sidnell J. Introduction. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013. p. 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage J, Maynard DW. Problems and prospects in the study of physician–patient interaction: 30 years of research. Annu Rev Sociol. 2006;32:351–374.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff EA. Confirming allusions: toward an empirical account of action. Am J Sociol. 1996;102:161–216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hepburn A, Bolden GB. The conversation analytic approach to transcription. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013. p. 57–76.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada L. The conversation analytic approach to data collection. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2013. p. 32–56.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff EA. Interaction: the infrastructure for social institutions, the natural ecological niche for language, and the arena in which culture is enacted. In: Enfield NJ, Levinson SC, editors. Roots of human sociality: culture, cognition and interaction. London: Berg; 2006. p. 70–96.
   Google Scholar
• Luff P, Jirotka M, Yamashita N, et al. Embedded interaction: the accomplishment of actions in everyday and video-mediated environments. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact. 2013;20:1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heath C, Luff P. Media space and communicative asymmetries: preliminary observations of video-mediated interaction. Human-Comp Interaction. 1992;7:315–346.
   Google Scholar