Kamhi Alan G
Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Oct;14(5):414-8. doi: 10.3109/17549507.2012.685889. Epub 2012 May 31.
The first part of this response to Baker (2012) examines studies that have attempted to determine the optimum treatment intensity of reading interventions associated with a Response to Intervention (RTI) model of service delivery. In general, the findings indicated that differences in broad measures of intensity (duration and scheduling) did not result in differences in reading outcomes. These non-significant findings and Baker's excellent discussion of all of the factors that impact treatment outcomes led me to question how useful pharmacological dosage concepts are for educators and speech-language pathologists (SLPs). This commentary concludes by acknowledging that the more information available about the active ingredients of treatment episodes, the better able one will be to design effective and efficient interventions to improve speech, language, and literacy.
对贝克(2012年)的这一回应的第一部分考察了一些研究,这些研究试图确定与回应干预(RTI)服务提供模式相关的阅读干预的最佳治疗强度。总体而言,研究结果表明,强度的宽泛衡量指标(持续时间和安排)的差异并未导致阅读结果的差异。这些无显著意义的研究结果以及贝克对所有影响治疗结果的因素的精彩讨论,让我质疑药理学剂量概念对教育工作者和言语语言病理学家(SLP)有多大用处。本评论最后承认,关于治疗过程中活性成分的信息越多,就越能更好地设计有效且高效的干预措施来改善言语、语言和读写能力。