Universal Trauma Screening in Preschool Speech and Language Services: Screening Process and Client Profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the implementation of universal trauma screening in publicly funded preschool speech and language (PSL) services. This article presents the results pertaining to the screening process and the client profiles of research participants (including trauma exposures and potential responses). Method: As part of a larger study, a clinical pilot and research study were undertaken. The clinical pilot included the design and implementation of a screening protocol where speech-language pathologists prescreened clients for potential trauma exposure during initial assessment, and then offered families a full trauma screening with a mental health professional. Data were collected from 193 speech-language pathologist–completed questionnaires following initial assessment and from the full trauma screenings of 57 children aged 9–50 months (which comprised the research study). Results: During PSL initial assessments, 30% of clients disclosed potential trauma exposure. The highest reported exposures included public health or environmental crises (33%), major family moves (30%), and significant separations from parents/caregivers or close family members (26%). Of the top seven reported exposures, four were characterized as interpersonal trauma, and 35% of clients reported at least three trauma exposures. A significant correlation was observed between the number of reported trauma exposures and potential trauma responses, which are commonly seen in PSL services, r (55) = .28, p = .037. Conclusions: The findings highlight the importance of integrating trauma-informed care universally in PSL services, including collaborative speech-language pathology and mental health services. Universal trauma screening in PSL services can identify at-risk children early, allowing for tailored interventions and better support for families. The study underscores the need for integrated services to address the complex needs of children exposed to trauma.
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 | 0.026 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".