Interventions for School-Aged Children with Auditory Processing Disorder: A Scoping Review.

(1) Background: Auditory processing (AP) disorder is associated with learning difficulties and poses challenges to school-aged children in their daily activities. This scoping review identifies interventions and provides audiologists with protocol insights and outcome measures. (2) Methods: A systematic search of both peer-reviewed and grey literature (January 2006 to August 2023) covered ten databases. Studies included had the following characteristics: (i) published in French or English; (ii) participants were school-aged, and had a normal audiogram, AP difficulties or disorder, and no cognitive, developmental, congenital or neurological disorder (with the exception of learning, attention, and language disabilities); (iii) were intervention studies or systematic reviews. (3) Results: Forty-two studies were included, and they predominantly featured auditory training (AT), addressing spatial processing, dichotic listening, temporal processing and listening to speech in noise. Some interventions included cognitive or language training, assistive devices or hearing aids. Outcome measures listed included electrophysiological, AP, cognitive and language measures and questionnaires addressed to parents, teachers or the participants. (4) Conclusions: Most interventions focused on bottom-up approaches, particularly AT. A limited number of top-down approaches were observed. The compiled tools underscore the need for research on metric responsiveness and point to the inadequate consideration given to understanding how children perceive change.

Traduction franco-canadienne de l'Assessment of Systematic Reviews Revised (AMSTAR 2) : validation transculturelle et fidélité interjuges.

Objective: Produce a French-Canadian translation of AMSTAR 2, affirm its content validity, and examine interrater reliability. Methods: Based on Vallerand's methodological approach, we conducted forward and parallel inverse-translations. Subsequently, an expert panel evaluated the translations to create a preliminary experimental French-Canadian version. A second expert panel examined this version and proposed additional modifications. Twenty future health professionals then rated the second experimental version for ambiguity on a scale (from 1 to 7). The principal co-investigators then reviewed the problematic elements and proposed a pre-official version. To ascertain content validity, a final back-translation was conducted resulting in the official version. Four judges evaluated 13 systematic reviews using the official French-Canadian version of AMSTAR 2. The Kappa coefficient was used to evaluate interrater reliability. Results: This rigorous adaptation enabled the development of a Franco-Canadian version of AMSTAR 2. Its application demonstrated low ambiguity (mean 1.15; SD 0.26) as well as good overall interrater reliability (total κ > 0.64) across all items. Conclusion: The French-Canadian version of AMSTAR 2 can now support francophone clinicians, educators, and managers in Canada as they undertake evidence-based practice.