Visual stimuli in intervention approaches for pre-schoolers diagnosed with phonological delay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to develop and content validate specific speech and language intervention picture cards: The Letter-Sound (L&S) cards. The present study was also focused on assessing the influence of these cards on letter-sound correspondences and speech sound production. An expert panel of six speech and language therapists analysed and discussed the L&S cards based on several criteria previously established. A Speech and Language Therapist carried out a 6-week therapeutic intervention with a group of seven Portuguese phonologically delayed pre-schoolers aged 5;3 to 6;5. The modified Bland-Altman method revealed good agreement among evaluators, that is the majority of the values was between the agreement limits. Additional outcome measures were collected before and after the therapeutic intervention process. Results indicate that the L&S cards facilitate the acquisition of letter-sound correspondences. Regarding speech sound production, some improvements were also observed at word level. The L&S cards are therefore likely to give phonetic cues, which are crucial for the correct production of therapeutic targets. These visual cues seemed to have helped children with phonological delay develop the above-mentioned skills.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".