Suchergebnisse

IntroductionThe Cleft Collective Cohort study is the world's largest multidisciplinary cleft lip/palate research programme. Despite being one of the most common birth anomalies, the causes of clefting are unknown. Treatment involves a considerable burden of care from birth onwards, together with a variety of social and psychological challenges.
Objectives and ApproachOur aim is to create the infrastructure and resources necessary to gain important new knowledge that will advance our understanding of the causes of cleft lip/palate, inform treatment and improve the lives of people born with cleft; data linkage is a key aspect of this. There are challenges associated with linking to multiple data sources (NHS Digital, Cleft National Registry). However, using the consent obtained, we are also able to link directly to the participant's medical notes held by their NHS cleft team; enabling us to access a variety of data, including free text.
ResultsThe study already collects social and demographic data via questionnaires and genetic data from biological samples. Data linkage enriches this but also enables us to validate and address missing data problems. However, linkage to external sources brings many challenges, including, governance, costs, access issues. By gaining direct access to cleft team medical notes these issues are significantly reduced and provide us with rich phenotype data that cannot be obtained elsewhere, for example, via 'read codes' within electronic medical records. By tailoring our own data collection tool we can collect specific cleft data to enhance the resource and allow for subtype analyses. This process can be repeated throughout the duration of this longitudinal study for subsequent data.
Conclusion/ImplicationsData linkage is a valuable resource but comes with many challenges. One route to overcome many of these issues is by accessing free text data directly from participants medical notes. The richness of these data allows for more in depth phenotypic analyses.

Background Both active and passive cigarette smoking have previously been associated with orofacial cleft aetiology. We aimed to analyse the impact of declining active smoking prevalence and the implementation of smoke-free legislation on the incidence of children born with a cleft lip and/or palate within the United Kingdom. Methods and findings We conducted regression analysis using national administrative data in the United Kingdom between 2000–2018. The main outcome measure was orofacial cleft incidence, reported annually for England, Wales and Northern Ireland and separately for Scotland. First, we conducted an ecological study with longitudinal time-series analysis using smoking prevalence data for females over 16 years of age. Second, we used a natural experiment design with interrupted time-series analysis to assess the impact of smoke-free legislation. Over the study period, the annual incidence of orofacial cleft per 10,000 live births ranged from 14.2–16.2 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and 13.4–18.8 in Scotland. The proportion of active smokers amongst females in the United Kingdom declined by 37% during the study period. Adjusted regression analysis did not show a correlation between the proportion of active smokers and orofacial cleft incidence in either dataset, although we were unable to exclude a modest effect of the magnitude seen in individual-level observational studies. The data in England, Wales and Northern Ireland suggested an 8% reduction in orofacial cleft incidence (RR 0.92, 95%CI 0.85 to 0.99; P = 0.024) following the implementation of smoke-free legislation. In Scotland, there was weak evidence for an increase in orofacial cleft incidence following smoke-free legislation (RR 1.16, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.44; P = 0.173). Conclusions These two ecological studies offer a novel insight into the influence of smoking in orofacial cleft aetiology, adding to the evidence base from individual-level studies. Our results suggest that smoke-free legislation may have reduced orofacial cleft ...

Background: The Child Talk study aimed to develop an evidence-based framework to support the decision-making of speech and language therapists (SLTs) as they design and plan interventions appropriate to the needs of individual children with primary speech and language impairments and their families. The need for early identification and effective intervention for these children continues to be a government policy priority because of the link between children's early speech and language skills and their broader well-being and outcomes in later life. The first phase of Child Talk sought to map and describe current SLT practice for these children; identify and summarise the existing research evidence relating to practice; and investigate the perspectives of parents, early years practitioners, preschool children and 'underserved' communities on speech and language therapy. The second phase of Child Talk focused on the development of a toolkit – assessment tools, outcome measures and a data set – to support future service and economic evaluations of the framework. Methods: Child Talk adopted a mixed-methods design. Quantitative methods included surveys and investigated the prevalence and patterns of intervention usage; qualitative data collection methods included focus groups, interviews and reflection to investigate participants' perspectives and understandings of interventions. Data analysis methods included descriptive and inferential statistics, thematic and content analysis and framework analysis. Participants were recruited nationally through six NHS sites, professional bodies, parent groups and advertising. Participants included SLTs ( n = 677), parents ( n = 84), preschool children ( n = 24), early years practitioners ( n = 31) and 'underserved' communities ( n = 52). Key findings: Speech and language therapy interventions were characterised in terms of nine themes, viewed as comprehensive and inclusive by practitioners. Relevant assessments, interventions and outcome domains were identified for the nine themes. Areas of tacit knowledge and underspecified processes contributed to variability in the detail of the framework. Systematic reviews identified 58 relevant and robust studies (from 55,271 papers retrieved from the initial literature search). The number of studies relevant to each theme varied from 1 to 33. Observational data on preschool children's perspectives on speech and language therapy interventions revealed the dynamic nature of their interaction with different activities and people within therapy sessions. Parents' experiences of speech and language therapy were generally positive although some reported that the rationale for therapy was not always clear. Parental perspectives in underserved communities suggested that, although parents were confident about how to support children's language development, they were less informed about the nature of language impairments and the function of speech and language therapy. The availability of information regarding resources directed towards speech and language therapy services was poor. In particular, services lacked both a culture of collecting outcome data routinely and measures of professional input and costs associated with their activities. Conclusion: A descriptive framework of SLT practice has been developed to support the discussions between therapists and families when making decisions regarding the selection of interventions and outcome measures. Further research is needed to address gaps in the intervention framework and evaluate its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in improving outcomes for preschool children with primary speech and language impairments.

Purpose: The aim of this tutorial is to support speech language pathologists (SLPs) undertaking assessments of multilingual children with suspected speech sound disorders, particularly children who speak languages that are not shared with their SLP. Method: The tutorial was written by the International Expert Panel on Multilingual Children's Speech, which comprises 46 researchers (SLPs, linguists, phoneticians, and speech scientists) who have worked in 43 countries and used 27 languages in professional practice. Seventeen panel members met for a 1-day workshop to identify key points for inclusion in the tutorial, 26 panel members contributed to writing this tutorial, and 34 members contributed to revising this tutorial online (some members contributed tomore than 1 task). Results: This tutorial draws on international research evidence and professional expertise to provide a comprehensive overview of working with multilingual children with suspected speech sound disorders. This overview addresses referral, case history, assessment, analysis, diagnosis, and goal setting and the SLP's cultural competence and preparation for working with interpreters and multicultural support workers and dealing with organizational and government barriers to and facilitators of culturally competent practice. Conclusion: The issues raised in this tutorial are applied in a hypothetical case study of an English-speaking SLP's assessment of a multilingual Cantonese-and English-speaking 4-year-old boy. Resources are listed throughout the tutorial.

Purpose The aim of this tutorial is to support speech-language pathologists (SLPs) undertaking assessments of multilingual children with suspected speech sound disorders, particularly children who speak languages that are not shared with their SLP. ; Method The tutorial was written by the International Expert Panel on Multilingual Children's Speech, which comprises 46 researchers (SLPs, linguists, phoneticians, and speech scientists) who have worked in 43 countries and used 27 languages in professional practice. Seventeen panel members met for a 1-day workshop to identify key points for inclusion in the tutorial, 26 panel members contributed to writing this tutorial, and 34 members contributed to revising this tutorial online (some members contributed to more than 1 task). ; Results This tutorial draws on international research evidence and professional expertise to provide a comprehensive overview of working with multilingual children with suspected speech sound disorders. This overview addresses referral, case history, assessment, analysis, diagnosis, and goal setting and the SLP's cultural competence and preparation for working with interpreters and multicultural support workers and dealing with organizational and government barriers to and facilitators of culturally competent practice. ; Conclusion The issues raised in this tutorial are applied in a hypothetical case study of an English-speaking SLP's assessment of a multilingual Cantonese- and English-speaking 4-year-old boy. Resources are listed throughout the tutorial. ; peer-reviewed

Purpose: The aim of this tutorial is to support speech language pathologists (SLPs) undertaking assessments of multilingual children with suspected speech sound disorders, particularly children who speak languages that are not shared with their SLP. Method: The tutorial was written by the International Expert Panel on Multilingual Children's Speech, which comprises 46 researchers (SLPs, linguists, phoneticians, and speech scientists) who have worked in 43 countries and used 27 languages in professional practice. Seventeen panel members met for a 1-day workshop to identify key points for inclusion in the tutorial, 26 panel members contributed to writing this tutorial, and 34 members contributed to revising this tutorial online (some members contributed tomore than 1 task). Results: This tutorial draws on international research evidence and professional expertise to provide a comprehensive overview of working with multilingual children with suspected speech sound disorders. This overview addresses referral, case history, assessment, analysis, diagnosis, and goal setting and the SLP's cultural competence and preparation for working with interpreters and multicultural support workers and dealing with organizational and government barriers to and facilitators of culturally competent practice. Conclusion: The issues raised in this tutorial are applied in a hypothetical case study of an English-speaking SLP's assessment of a multilingual Cantonese-and English-speaking 4-year-old boy. Resources are listed throughout the tutorial. ; Australian Research Council: FT0990588 ; United States Department of Health & Human Services National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA NIH National Institute on Deafness & Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)