Preliteracy Skills in Young Children Who are Deaf/Hard of Hearing: Secondary Analysis of the Technology-assisted Language Intervention Randomized Trials.
Elodie Betances, Susan Wiley, Meredith Tabangin and 6 others
PMID 40700591WHAT IT FOUND
Preliteracy skills in deaf/hard-of-hearing children with language delays improved significantly over 24 and 48 weeks.
Growth was driven by improving language skills, not by the specific therapy type. Both intervention groups showed similar gains, suggesting language development itself supports early literacy.
Key findings
01Children with language delays showed significant growth in preliteracy scores over 24 weeks, increasing by an average of 12.0 percentage points.
02Improvements in expressive language were significantly associated with increases in overall preliteracy and early reading scores.
03There were no statistically significant differences in preliteracy growth between children receiving the TALI intervention and those receiving treatment as usual.
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
The study was a secondary analysis of trials designed to measure spoken language outcomes, not preliteracy, so it was not powered to detect differences between intervention groups for this outcome. Preliteracy data relied on parent report, which may introduce bias. The sample size for the comparison between intervention groups was small (24 in TALI, 21 in TAU completed both timepoints), limiting certainty about the lack of difference. Data on parent engagement and home literacy environments were not collected, which are known factors in early literacy.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the lack of significant difference between TALI and TAU as evidence that AAC interventions are ineffective for preliteracy. The study was underpowered for this secondary outcome, and both groups improved, suggesting that general language growth drives preliteracy gains.
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 →