A professional perspective on EBP in stuttering: How far have we come in 20 years?

This article reviews a critique by Bernstein Ratner (2005) to identify progress made in applying EBP to stuttering intervention and areas in which less progress has been observed. Among indices of progress are plentiful basic science and therapy outcomes reports, broader views of effectiveness, and increased representation of people who stutter in program development and evaluation. Among concerns we discuss are: (1) continued disconnects between basic science to understand the nature of stuttering and the therapies we employ with our clients; (2) a need for better understanding of causal mechanisms and mediators of change in stuttering interventions; and (3) specific challenges that make it difficult to know if therapies for early stuttering work significantly better than spontaneous recovery. We also discuss the (4) merits of broadening goals for preschool-aged children and their families; and (5) discuss potential negative ramifications of weakly supported interventions and recommendations for children whose stuttering persists past preschool. We conclude with a section on (6) important questions and populations that we believe remain under- investigated.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Fluency Disorders
Published
2025-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfludis.2025.106171
Primary Topic
Stuttering Research and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A professional perspective on EBP in stuttering: How far have we come in 20 years?

Shelley B. Brundage, Nan Bernstein Ratner
Journal of Fluency Disorders
Stuttering Research and Treatment
article

A professional perspective on EBP in stuttering: How far have we come in 20 years?

Shelley B. Brundage, Nan Bernstein Ratner
article en

Abstract

This article reviews a critique by Bernstein Ratner (2005) to identify progress made in applying EBP to stuttering intervention and areas in which less progress has been observed. Among indices of progress are plentiful basic science and therapy outcomes reports, broader views of effectiveness, and increased representation of people who stutter in program development and evaluation. Among concerns we discuss are: (1) continued disconnects between basic science to understand the nature of stuttering and the therapies we employ with our clients; (2) a need for better understanding of causal mechanisms and mediators of change in stuttering interventions; and (3) specific challenges that make it difficult to know if therapies for early stuttering work significantly better than spontaneous recovery. We also discuss the (4) merits of broadening goals for preschool-aged children and their families; and (5) discuss potential negative ramifications of weakly supported interventions and recommendations for children whose stuttering persists past preschool. We conclude with a section on (6) important questions and populations that we believe remain under- investigated.

Journal of Fluency DisordersVol. 87
George Washington University (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Stuttering Research and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.