English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

To comprehensively evaluate children’s speech and language development, speechlanguage pathologists (SLPs) typically rely on a combination of formal and informal assessment tools. When integrated, these tools are useful in determining eligibility for intervention services and providing descriptive information to establish baseline performance for speech-language progress monitoring [1]. In contrast to formal measures such as standardized tests (for an overview of standardized assessment tools appropriPurpose: Clinicians and researchers depend in part on informal measures, those that are not standardized or norm referenced, to reliably represent young children’s speech sound productions. However, few investigations have explored the reliable use of such measures with young children. Consequently, little is known about the consistency of extrapolated findings from informal measures. The present study aimed to address this issue by testing the short-term (one week) reliability of informal measures used for independent analyses of speech sound productions, analyses that describe productions without comparison to an adult standard, with two-year-old children.

Connected speech of two-year-olds: Test-retest reliability for assessment of phonetic inventory and word shape analysis