Research Priorities in Augmentative and Alternative Communication as Identified by People Who Use AAC and their Facilitators

O'Keefe et al. (2007) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

augmentative and alternative communication

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

North America - Canada

Why was it conducted at all?

Even though the large number of people who rely on AAC and the individuals who facilitate communication for them are the most important stakeholders of AAC services (Blackstone, 1992; DeRuyter, 1992), their perspectives on research priorities have not been systematically studied. Soliciting priorities generated by persons who use AAC and those individuals who frequently communicate with them is not only useful in the research context, but also represents another approach to identifying broader needs that could be considered important at a clinical level during service delivery.

What was the objective?

to determine the perspectives of the participants who used augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) and the perspectives of AAC facilitators about research priorities in AAC

What was the outcome?

a list of 6 research topics

How long did the research prioritization take?

No information provided.

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?

focus group; survey

How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: 2 focus groups: round 1: comprised of adults who used AAC and 2 focus groups comprised of adult AAC facilitators, participants were asked to determine their levels of agreement with the six priorities established in 1995 by the original NIDCD-sponsored researchers, prior to focus group participants received six-page document about research in general and AAC research in particular. Step 2: data processing: thematic analysis, report drafted. Step 3: focus groups: round 2: to discuss focus group report, accuracy of report and interpretation of that information, participants then discussed revisions, participants were then sent home with questionnaire containing six priorities set by the original NIDCD forum researchers and asked to state their level of agreement with each of the priorities

Which stakeholders took part?

Adults who used AAC, adult AAC facilitators. Focus groups 1 and 2: 12 participants: 6 adults who use AAC and 6 facilitators. Survey: 12 participants.

How were stakeholders recruited?

The participants who used AAC were located using the Disability Research Link Data Base. Facilitator participants were located through Toronto and Hamilton, Ontario-area AAC clinics, advocacy groups, and support groups.

Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?

Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.