One Call Away: Bilingual Teleassessment for Preschool and Elementary Children: A Systematic Review.
Aleksandra Kappenberg, Ulla Licandro
PMID 41076553WHAT IT FOUND
Bilingual teleassessment can yield results comparable to face-to-face testing for preschool and elementary children.
Caregivers can reliably administer assessments with clear guidance, though success depends on stable internet, suitable hardware, and careful session planning.
Key findings
01Teleassessment produced comparable results to face-to-face assessments for receptive vocabulary, grammar, and narrative skills in bilingual children.
02Caregiver-directed bilingual teleassessment yielded language samples comparable to those collected by speech-language therapists.
03Most included studies were small, with more than half involving approximately 20 or fewer children, and few reported detailed technology requirements.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only seven studies were included, and sample sizes were small (10 to 89 participants). Most studies were conducted in English-speaking countries, limiting generalisability to other regions. Many studies did not report detailed technology conditions like internet speed or device types. Heterogeneity in participant ages, language backgrounds, and assessment tools made direct comparison difficult. Only two studies included children over the age of eight. The review excluded non-English and non-peer-reviewed publications, potentially missing relevant data.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest and stated they pursue exclusively scientific and not commercial interests. ChatGPT was used for language refinement.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume bilingual teleassessment is universally equivalent to face-to-face testing. The evidence base is small, with only seven studies, and most involved typically developing children or those with speech/language disorders without biomedical conditions. Results may not generalise to children with complex needs, and the lack of detailed technology reporting means the impact of poor internet or hardware on assessment validity remains unclear.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →