<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/148719">
    <title>OPUS Collection:</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10453/148719</link>
    <description />
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/194853" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/194852" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/178042" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/177271" />
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
    <dc:date>2026-06-10T07:27:03Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
  <item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/194853">
    <title>How simple can a treatment for early stuttering be? A proposed two-factor early intervention</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10453/194853</link>
    <description>Title: How simple can a treatment for early stuttering be? A proposed two-factor early intervention
Authors: Onslow, M; Hearne, A; Yu, K; O'Brian, S; Menzies, R; Lowe, R
Abstract: In this clinical focus article, we draw attention to the need for immediate intervention shortly after stuttering onset. More than half of stuttering onsets occur before 3 years of age. We argue that existing interventions for preschool children who stutter require varying levels of cognitive engagement from children; hence, they are not suitable for children of that age. For this reason, we argue that there is no clinical trials evidence for treatment efficacy with children younger than 3 years of age. There are many recommended parent strategies that do not require any active participation from children, which, therefore, may be suitable for immediate stuttering intervention. Two of these have laboratory support in their favor: parent speech rate reduction and increased interturn speaker latency. Therefore, we developed a clinical protocol based on those two parent strategies and showed the clinical viability of the protocol with three children who stuttered. We argue that automation of our proposed treatment with lifelike artificial intelligence–generated avatar clinicians will make it globally viable, and a suitable target for future Phases I–IV clinical trials.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-03-10T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/194852">
    <title>A Phase I trial of iLidcombe: Online treatment for young children who stutter</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10453/194852</link>
    <description>Title: A Phase I trial of iLidcombe: Online treatment for young children who stutter
Authors: Ross, F; Onslow, M; Jones, M; Menzies, R; Packman, A; O'Brian, S; Hearne, A; Lowe, R
Abstract: AIM: The aim of this Phase I trial was to assess the safety, compliance, and potential efficacy of iLidcombe, a standalone internet version of the Lidcombe Program for young children who stutter. METHOD: We used a prospective single-group design involving 6 months of access to iLidcombe. Assessments occurred pretreatment and after 6 months of access. Participants were 20 parents of young children who stuttered. RESULTS: There was evidence of stuttering severity reduction after using iLidcombe for 6 months. Compliance with the program was favorable, and there was no suggestion of any psychologically adverse impact on children. CONCLUSION: The results of this Phase I trial provide a roadmap for further Phases II-IV clinical trial development.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-04-27T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/178042">
    <title>Lidcombe Program telehealth treatment for children 6-12 years of age: A Phase II trial.</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10453/178042</link>
    <description>Title: Lidcombe Program telehealth treatment for children 6-12 years of age: A Phase II trial.
Authors: Johnson, G; Onslow, M; Carey, B; Jones, M; Kefalianos, E
Abstract: BACKGROUND: For children older than 6 years who stutter, there is a gap in clinical research. This is an issue for speech-language pathologists because the tractability of stuttering decreases and the risk of long-term psychological consequences increase with age. PURPOSE: To report a Phase II trial of a telehealth version of the Lidcombe Program with school-age children. METHODS: Participants were 37 children who stuttered, 6-12 years of age, from Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Parents were trained by video telehealth how to deliver the Lidcombe Program to their child. Primary and secondary outcomes were stuttering severity and psychosocial functioning measured pre-treatment and at 6 months and 12 months after starting treatment. Parents submitted two 10-minute recordings of their child speaking in conversation, and three measures of anxiety, impact of stuttering, and communication attitude. RESULTS: Six months after starting treatment, seven children (18.9%) attained Lidcombe Program Stage 2 criteria, 25 children (67.6%) showed a partial response to treatment, and five children (13.5%) showed no response. By 12 months, 12 children (32.4%) had reached Stage 2 criteria. Psychosocial improvements were observed 6 and 12 months after starting treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The Lidcombe Program may eliminate or nearly eliminate stuttering for about one third of children 6-12 years of age. Randomized controlled trials with this age group involving the Lidcombe Program are warranted. In the interim, the Lidcombe Program is a clinical option clinicians can implement with this age group to reduce stuttering and its psychosocial impacts.</description>
    <dc:date>2024-04-07T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/177271">
    <title>Contemporary clinical conversations about stuttering: What does brain imaging research mean to clinicians?</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10453/177271</link>
    <description>Title: Contemporary clinical conversations about stuttering: What does brain imaging research mean to clinicians?
Authors: Chang, S-E; Jackson, ES; Santayana, G; Zavos, G; Onslow, M</description>
  </item>
</rdf:RDF>

