Working Toward Recommended Terminology in the Canadian Preschool Speech-Language Pathology Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This quality improvement project aimed to address the inconsistent use of clinical labels across a preschool speech and language program in Ontario, Canada. The study investigated whether a multicomponent knowledge translation (KT) intervention could increase speech-language pathologists' (SLPs') knowledge about the recommended clinical labels, motivate their intentions to use the labels, and facilitate practice change during a 3-month pilot period. METHOD: The diffusion of innovations theory was utilized to identify and address known and suspected barriers and facilitators that could influence the adoption of consistent terminology. The intervention was evaluated using a pre-experimental study design (with pre, post, and follow-up testing) and included two phases: Phase 1 involved the pretraining survey, KT intervention, and posttraining survey, and Phase 2 included an exit survey after a 3-month pilot period. RESULTS: Five hundred twenty-nine SLPs in Phase 1 and 387 SLPs in Phase 2 participated. Following the web-based intervention, SLPs demonstrated improved knowledge about the recommended labels with most indicating intentions to communicate the labels going forward. SLPs also reported increased comfort using labels and positive views on their importance and value. After the 3-month pilot period, SLPs' reported use of most recommended labels decreased, as did ratings of comfort, value, and importance. However, most SLPs reported intentions to use the labels going forward. CONCLUSIONS: Despite having intentions to adopt the recommended labels, the lack of implementation by SLPs suggests the presence of additional barriers impacting their use of the recommended clinical labels in practice. Future work should investigate clinician-identified barriers to inform future implementation efforts. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25254940.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".