ABSTRACT
This umbrella review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of pragmatic language interventions and existing competing views in improving pragmatic language skills in persons with pragmatic language impairment (PLI). A comprehensive search was conducted to identify qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews that included diagnostic criteria, features, development and course, risk and prognostic factors, differential diagnosis of PLI, and existing interventions, views, and arguments to improve the pragmatic language abilities/skills of persons with PLI. Syntheses were critically appraised by two independent reviewers using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses. This umbrella review was registered with PROSPERO on 9th December 2022 under the registration number CRD42022378690. Out of 3,609 studies, 42 reviews were included in this umbrella review. The extracted findings were categorized based on theoretical intervention perspectives, which included behavioral, social-pragmatic, and cognitive-linguistic approaches. The studies revealed that pragmatic language interventions had a positive impact on improving pragmatic language skills in persons with PLI. However, competing views on pragmatic language interventions were also identified, suggesting the need for a more comprehensive approach that includes both behavioral and cognitive-linguistic components. In conclusion, cognitive-linguistic approach was the most documented intervention method, and suiting intervention methods to the complex nature of PLI is crucial. The documented intervention methods reflected competing views on the nature of PLI, highlighting the need for tailored interventions.
ABSTRACT
Across the world, many infants, children, adults, and elderly people are reported with many types of disorders and disabilities that damage, delay, or impede typical language development and/or use. Speech-language pathologists and other relevant clinicians are responsible for diagnosing, assessing, and rehabilitating these conditions. In nearly all types of disorders or disabilities that affect language, clinical linguistics plays a significant role in their study, diagnosis, and evaluation. This study provides a thorough analysis of the field of clinical linguistics. Data from Scopus, WOS, and Lens were used between 1981 and 2022. The documents included in the analysis were 1685, 1628, and 2677 articles published between 1981 and 2022 in clinical linguistics in Scopus, WOS, and Lens, respectively. For the purpose of assessing the development and impacts of the field of clinical linguistics, we used eight bibliometric and eight scientometric indicators. As part of the study, the results summarized the top contributors to clinical linguistics in terms of production size by year, country, university/research centre, journal, publisher, and author. The impact of the examined evidence on clinical linguistics was visualized and tabulated in the form of visual networks, citation counts, burst, cooccurrence, centrality, and sigma factors that are helpful in identifying the main influencers in clinical linguistics. A few examples of clinical linguistics patterns that are being explored extensively by researchers include cleft palate speech with model theories, visual feedback, motor speech disorders with instrumental analysis, acoustic analysis to understand conversational breakdown, nonlinear phonological theory, aphasic conversation in atypical interaction, and diagnostic markers in functional segments. There are also phonological disorders, William Syndrome, and the use of ultrasound, which may be considered potential clusters of clinical linguistics. A key contribution of this paper is highlighting the importance of clinical linguistics as well as its integration with linguistics, speech-language pathology, neurolinguistics, psycholinguistics, neuroscience, cognitive sciences, psychology, and psychometrics.
