Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40469927›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2025

Social validation of post-treatment outcomes of adults who stutter who participated in CARE Model treatment: replication and extension.

Geoffrey A Coalson, Courtney T Byrd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Geoffrey A CoalsonArthur M. Blank Center for Stuttering Education and Research, Austin, TX, United States.
Courtney T ByrdArthur M. Blank Center for Stuttering Education and Research, Austin, TX, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Social validation provides external validity of treatment outcomes from the perspective of untrained observers. To date, clinical efficacy studies of the Blank Center CARE Method: Ten adults who stutter provided communication samples one week before and after completing the Blank Center CARE Model treatment. A total of 1,110 untrained observers were recruited. Each untrained observer rated only one participant at one timepoint (pre-treatment or post-treatment) in one context (dyad or presentation), and each participant was asked to provide only one rating (communication competence or stuttering severity). Results: A significant interaction indicated that post-treatment gains were observed for communication competence, but not stuttering severity, for both contexts. Conclusions: Present findings provide further social validation of the Blank Center CARE Model of treatment. Untrained observers confirmed that participation in this strengths-based approach significantly enhances communication competence. Notably, these changes were observed regardless of pre- to post-treatment stuttering severity, lending additional support to the premise that changes in communication and fluency are independent constructs.

Indexed as

adultsnon-ableistsocial validationstammeringstutteringtreatment

Identifiers

PMID40469927
PMCPMC12133745

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.