Implementation of a manualized communication intervention for school‐aged children with pragmatic and social communication needs in a randomized controlled trial: the Social Communication Intervention Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Speech-language interventions are often complex in nature, involving multiple observations, variable outcomes and individualization in treatment delivery. The accepted procedure associated with randomized controlled trials (RCT) of such complex interventions is to develop and implement a manual of intervention in order that reliable treatment delivery can be achieved. AIMS: To present the rationale, structure and content of an intensive manualized intervention as implemented within an RCT for children with complex pragmatic and social communication needs; to investigate factors associated with implementation in a mainstream school environment; and to determine treatment fidelity. METHODS & PROCEDURES: The manualized SCIP intervention, including procedures for developing individualized treatment plans, was developed and then implemented within an RCT with 57 school-aged children with complex pragmatic communication needs (CwPLI). The paper describes the delivery protocol, staffing requirements, and content and structure of the intervention. A mapping procedure for individualization of intervention and the implemented components of intervention are presented. The findings from a school-therapy alliance checklist for recording factors affecting implementation in a school context are also reported. Treatment fidelity was carried out using measures of delivered versus planned treatment content and quality of therapy. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The manual was effective at detailing intervention procedures and allowing for development of individualized treatment plans whilst maintaining satisfactory treatment fidelity. Treatment planning and delivery required continuous specialist speech and language therapist input with assistants needing substantive training and supervision. Key components of intervention for CwPLI were therapies aimed at improving conversation skills, narrative construction, comprehension monitoring, understanding of social cues and metapragmatic awareness. The school-therapy alliance checklist indicated high rates of therapist-education staff and therapist-parent liaison. Parents were nearly always involved in treatment planning though only half-attended therapy sessions. Learning support provision in schools for participating children was highly variable. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Predetermining theoretical background, structure, and content in a treatment manual contributed towards the quality and reliability of intervention within the context of an RCT. The implementation of SCIP intervention in a broader clinical context is discussed with reference to staff expertise, the therapeutic process and the essential ingredients of social communication intervention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".