Can You See My Screen? Virtual Assessment in Speech and Language.

PURPOSE: This introduction presents the LSHSS Forum: Can You See My Screen? Virtual Assessment in Speech and Language. The goals of the forum are to document reliability and validity of assessment results conducted virtually, identify characteristics of measures that are suitable for online assessment, and provide clinical and research guidance for interpreting diagnostic results obtained in virtual settings. METHOD: In this introduction, we provide an overview of the research completed by nine teams, who submitted research articles and notes on a variety of topics pertinent to the theme of telehealth assessments. Of these, seven teams investigated the validity and reliability of 14 different assessment tools, while two teams described training and experience issues. CONCLUSION: The nine studies presented in this forum will provide speech-language pathologists with insight into a range of issues regarding telehealth assessment, including the breadth of suitable assessment tools; practical strategies for assessing children with a diverse range of ages, languages, skills, and abilities; and the unexpected challenges and opportunities of conducting clinical work and research during a global pandemic.

From a Distance: Comparison of In-Person and Virtual Assessments With Adult-Child Dyads From Linguistically Diverse Backgrounds.

PURPOSE: Our proof-of-concept study tested the feasibility of virtual testing using child assessments that were originally validated for in-person testing only. METHOD: Ten adult-child dyads were assigned to complete both in-person and virtual tests of language, cognition, and narratives. Child participants fell between the ages of 4 and 8 years; adult participants were speech-language clinicians or researchers with experience in administering child assessments. Half of child participants were Spanish-English bilinguals, and half were monolingual English speakers. RESULTS: Results showed similar performance across in-person and virtual modalities on all assessments. Recommendations for adapting, administering, and scoring virtual measures with linguistically diverse children are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Although additional research on virtual assessment is needed, our results open opportunities for appropriate remote assessment, particularly for bilingual children, who may not have in-person access to speech-language pathology services.

Factors influencing US speech and language therapists' use of technology for clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing number of technological resources available to speech and language therapists (SLTs) for use in clinical practice, but the factors that influence SLTs' selection and use of such resources are not well understood. In related fields, technology acceptance models have been employed to explain users' adoption of technology and to inform the advancement of empirically supported technological resources. AIMS: To determine the factors that influence SLTs' use of technology for clinical practice by testing a model of their technology acceptance and use. METHODS & PROCEDURES: We surveyed 209 practising SLTs in the United States representative of the speech and language membership of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA). Participants completed a 38-item electronic survey representing four categories: (1) technology use, (2) technology attitudes and factors influencing technology use, (3) employment information and (4) demographics. Items measuring technology attitudes served as indicators of the research model, which mapped the primary relationships of a technology acceptance model. Survey data were collected before the Covid-19 pandemic. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The research model accounted for 66% of the variance in SLTs' behavioural intention to use technology, which significantly and positively predicted the amount of time they reportedly spent using technology in the workplace. Subjective norms and attitudes towards technology use directly predicted the intention to use technology. Perceived usefulness and ease of use indirectly predicted intention to use technology. Survey respondents reported using technology during 48% (SD = 24%) of their overall weekly work hours on average, with a large majority reporting using technology at least once per week for planning (89% of respondents), assessment (66% of respondents) or intervention (90% of respondents). CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: These findings statistically explain the relationships between SLTs' attitudes and their intention to use technology for clinical practice, contributing to our understanding of why SLTs adopt certain technologies. We also detail the nature and frequency of technology use in the clinical practice of SLTs. Future directions for this work include further exploring use categories, employing direct measurements of technology use and exploring the impact of recent changes in SLT service delivery due to the Covid-19 pandemic on SLTs' technology attitudes. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject Existing research about the adoption and use of technological resources by SLTs indicates that they select tools based on convenience, cost and recommendations by others. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study is the first to develop and test a research model of SLTs' technology attitudes. The findings from model testing demonstrate the significant predictors of SLTs' behavioural intention to use technology for clinical purposes. Intent of use is related to how much SLTs use technology in the workplace. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The present findings can inform interventions targeting the design and adoption of electronic SLT resources that are empirically supported.