Skip to content

A Comparison of Language Intervention Programs

A Comparison of Language Intervention Programs

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00033150
Enrollment
216
Registered
2002-04-09
Start date
2002-06-30
Completion date
2005-01-31
Last updated
2006-04-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Language Disorders

Keywords

Specific Language Impairment, Fast ForWord, Language therapy, Auditory processing

Brief summary

Brief Summary: Nearly 7% of elementary school children present with difficulties learning and using language. Unfortunately, language impairments are often long lasting and may have serious social, academic, and vocational ramifications. More than 1 million children receive language intervention in the public schools each year, and many more are seen in hospitals and other clinical settings. This randomized clinical trial compares the language outcomes of Fast ForWord to two other interventions (computer assisted language intervention without acoustically modified speech and individual language intervention) and to the outcomes of an academic enrichment (control) condition. Each year for 3 years, children will be randomly assigned to each of the four conditions at three regional sites (Austin, Texas, Dallas, Texas, and Lawrence, Kansas). The treatments will be administered in special summer programs. The primary research question is which intervention results in the most improvement in the composite language score from the Oral and Written Language Scales. Secondary questions include which intervention results in the greatest gains in conversational language,which intervention results in the greatest gains 3 and 6 months after training, which intervention results in the greatest improvement in auditory perception, and which intervention is the most cost effective. The results of the study will have theoretical and practical value. Theoretically, the study tests the temporal processing hypothesis of language impairment. Practically, the study will describe and compare the language, communication, auditory processing and academic outcomes of different language interventions. The study will help clinicians and administrators choose the most effective and least expensive treatment for the children they serve.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALAcademic enrichment
BEHAVIORALFast ForWord
BEHAVIORALComputer Assisted Language Intervention
BEHAVIORALIndividual Language Intervention

Sponsors

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
Lead SponsorNIH

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
6 Years to 9 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* age 6 to 9 years * score between 75 and 125 on the Matrices subtest of the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test * Speaking Quotient of 79 or lower on the Test of Language Development: Primary: 3rd Edition

Exclusion criteria

* Previous participation in 8 or more hours of language intervention or classroom activities using any of the Fast ForWord, Laureate, or Earobics speech-language or reading software and/or the Lindamood-Bell auditory discrimination training * Failure of a hearing screening test * An episode of otitis media in the previous 12 months * Evidence of focal brain lesion, traumatic brain injury, cerebral palsy, or seizure disorder * Abnormality of oral structure or function impeding normal language production

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026