Logo
For the best experience, open in your browser!
homearrow_rightMorearrow_rightOur Process

Our Process

How do we produce the monthly collection of plain-language research reviews for speech–language pathologists?

  • Scouts

    Search the science

    We search hundreds of journals each month, reading an average of 3k abstracts, and narrow that down to what might be relevant for SLPs.

  • Writers

    Read the science, then write up what’s useful

    From stacks of around 200–400 journal articles monthly, each writer reads 10–20 papers. They then write up (or review) any research that will be clinically actionable for SLPs.

  • Topic Area Experts

    Ensure accuracy

    We consult with topic area experts (usually internal, sometimes external) to ensure the accuracy of the writer’s work.

  • Editors

    Ensure quality

    Editors help the writers make sure their reviews are straightforward and easy-to-read.

  • Scientists

    Confirm accuracy of our work

    Editors contact the original journal article authors, so that they can provide input and help ensure that we’re accurately reporting their research.

  • Voice artists

    Record audio

    All written reviews are recorded by our audio staff so that you can listen to reviews on the go.

  • Cartoonists

    Create research art

    Staff artists create cartoons to help make reviews memorable or easier to understand.

  • Editors

    Create supplemental resources

    We want implementation to be as easy as possible. So when there’s opportunities to create charts, calculators, or printable resources for you, we do it!

  • You

    Know what works!

    We publish the reviews, and you get to stay up-to-date on the evidence, without the stress.

  • Scouts

    Search the science

    We search hundreds of journals each month, reading an average of 3k abstracts, and narrow that down to what might be relevant for SLPs.

  • Writers

    Write research reviews

    From stacks of around 200–400 journal articles monthly, each writer reads 10–20 papers. They then write up (or review) any research that will be clinically actionable for SLPs.

  • Topic Area Experts

    Ensure accuracy

    We consult with topic area experts (usually internal, sometimes external) to ensure the accuracy of the writer’s work.

  • Editors

    Ensure quality

    Editors help the writers make sure their reviews are straightforward and easy-to-read.

  • Scientists

    Confirm accuracy of our work

    Editors contact the original journal article authors, so that they can provide input and help ensure that we’re accurately reporting their research.

  • Voice artists

    Record audio

    All written reviews are recorded by our audio staff so that you can listen to reviews on the go.

  • Cartoonists

    Create research art

    Staff artists create cartoons to help make reviews memorable or easier to understand.

  • Editors

    Create supplemental resources

    We want implementation to be as easy as possible. So when there’s opportunities to create charts, calculators, or printable resources for you, we do it!

  • You

    Know what works!

    We publish the reviews, and you get to stay up-to-date on the evidence, without the stress.

What We Write

EBP Basics

EBP Basics are "how-to" pieces written by TISLP staff. Rather than covering specific scientific articles, they discuss topics related to how to use our site and how to practice speech-language pathology in an evidence-informed way. EBP Basics are eligible for CE credit.

Start Here

Our Start Here content guides are high-level overviews of areas of SLP practice. They are intended to give SLPs who are new to practice (or a specific practice area) or new to our site a roadmap for understanding the topic by providing an outline and walking them through our site's related content. Some Start Heres are eligible for CE credit, depending on how much original content they include beyond links to our research reviews. If you use a Start Here as a syllabus—reading each linked review and collecting CE credit as you go—you can earn multiple hours of credit.

Brief

Briefs are very short research reviews where the relevant takeaway for clinicians can be captured in a sentence or two. Briefs are not eligible for CE credit.

Review

Our research reviews make up the bulk of our database. A review contains a summary and analysis of one or more newly published, peer-reviewed articles focused on clinical application—what a clinician might do differently in practice based on this information. Articles reviewed may include clinical tutorials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Reviews are selected based on relevance, findings, and scientific quality, and they pass through multiple layers of review to ensure accuracy and minimize bias. Note that our reviews are not the same as systematic, narrative, scoping, or literature reviews. All reviews are eligible for CE credit.

Ask TISLP

Ask TISLPs are deep dives into topics of interest that include information from many sources, not just one or two journal articles. Although not formal systematic reviews, they reflect the current best evidence as judged by our editorial staff, consulted experts, and cited sources. Topics are often inspired by questions from our members—contact us if you have requests. All Ask TISLPs are eligible for CE credit.

Editorial

Editorials are opinion pieces on hot topics in our field, written by TISLP staff or paid guest experts. Like our other content, they are reviewed by multiple staff members and subject-matter experts when needed to ensure accuracy. Editorials are eligible for CE credit.

What We Read

We don’t just read some of the science; we read all of the science that’s relevant to speech–language pathologists. The following journals are scouted monthly by our team:

  • Acta Paediatrica

  • Activities, Adaptation, and Aging

  • Advances in Neonatal care 

  • AERA Open

  • Age and Ageing

  • Aging and Mental Health

  • Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

  • ALTER – European Journal of Disability Research

  • Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders

  • Alzheimer's and Dementia

  • American Annals of the Deaf

  • American Educational Research Journal

  • American Journal of Gastroenterology

  • American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

  • American Journal of Occupational Therapy

  • American Journal of Otolaryngology

  • American Journal of Perinatology

  • American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

  • American Journal of Speech Language Pathology

  • American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

  • American Sociological Review

  • Annals of Biomedical Engineering

  • Annals of Dyslexia

  • Annals of Long-Term Care

  • Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology

  • Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine

  • Annual Review of Psychology

  • Aphasiology

  • Appetite

  • Applied Linguistics

  • Applied Psycholinguistics

  • Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics

  • Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

  • Assessment for Effective Intervention

  • Assistive Technology: The Official Journal of RESNA

  • Augmentative and Alternative Communication

  • Auris Nasus Larynx

  • Australian Journal of Education

  • Autism

  • Autism and Developmental Language Impairments

  • Autism Research

How We Research

All journals were added to our list via one or more of the following methods:

  • The journal was in the top 50 of at least one of the following lists between 2016 and 2019:

    • Advanced and Specialized Nursing (h-index; SCIMago)

    • Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology (h-index)

    • Developmental Disabilities (h-index)

    • Developmental and Educational Psychology (h-index; SCIMago)

    • Geriatrics and Gerontology (h-index; SCIMago)

    • Language and Linguistics (h-index; SCIMago)

    • Linguistics and Education (Thompson-Reuters Impact Factor)

    • Neurology (clinical) (h-index; SCIMago)

    • Otorhinolaryngology and Rehabilitation (h-index; SCIMago)

    • Speech and Hearing (SCImago)

  • The journal did not make one of the top impact factor lists (above), but was instead included for ”high topic relevance”. We have several instances in which we’ve used these alternative methods to identify more journals:

    • Frequent publications ( > 10) were found in PubMed between 2006 and 2020 on the topics/keywords that are within SLPs’ scope and articles identified were relevant to speech–language pathology at the title level. Any journals that fit this criteria are added to our list, and we take data on those journals for several months, to determine if they need to stay on our list.

    • Multiple articles relevant to speech–language pathology (and an h-index > 30) were found by exporting the top 1000 articles (sorted by Best Match) in PubMed on this topic. Any journals that fit this criteria were added to our list.

    • Scholarly experts In the following topic areas were recruited to add any journals to the list we may have been missing, due to the interdisciplinary nature of these topics: developmental disabilities, reading, dysphagia, voice, deaf and hard of hearing populations, adults with developmental disabilities, pediatric feeding, and several others. Note that we continue to collaborate with experts in the field to ensure that are aren’t missing journals or keywords in our searches. Hiring of topic experts (either temporarily or permanently) to refine and audit our research scouting procedures is something that is ongoing.

So do you review ALL the articles published in each of these journals, every month?

We go through them all, but don’t tell you about all of them. Instead, we only write up reviews of articles that are immediately clinically applicable. This process is one of the things that makes the reviews so time efficient. SLPs don’t need to know about all the research, every single month. Instead, they need to know about the things that could change their clinical practice.

Basically, when we’re reading through the hundreds of articles published each month from the above journals, narrowing first by title, then by abstract, then reading the full article, at each step along the way, we ask ourselves ”Is this potentially relevant to SLPs’ daily practice?”. When the answer is YES, we review it for our members. When NO, we set it aside.

Most months, this yields at least five to ten articles to review, per section (so between 15 and 30 reviews across all three sections). In ”light” months, when not much has been published, we’ll include Throwback Pubs too, so that you always have plenty of great content to read. Throwback Pubs are articles published in the years before The Informed SLP® existed (so before 2016) and are the writers’ choice.

NOTE:

  • Articles are sometimes hard to get ahold of. While we wait on document delivery, the current month’s deadline may pass. If that happens, the article would simply be included in the next month’s edition.

  • Relevance at this time is for SLPs residing in predominantly English-speaking countries. We hope to be able to address the needs of SLPs globally as The Informed SLP® grows.

Once TISLP points me toward an article I should read, how do I get the full-text article?

We always link you directly to the publisher’s website, where the article may be purchased. For more information on accessing journal articles, read here.

The reviews describe original research. How do I know that the research is interpreted correctly? What are your quality control procedures?

At The Informed SLP®, we’re comfortable with saying ”I don’t know”, and doing additional research as needed. You’ll notice that our writers are a team of people who all have both a research and clinical background, which is a minimum requirement to write for us. We’re learners at heart and enthusiastic investigators!

But not only are our writers quite skilled but, more importantly, every review also goes through an Editor, and sometimes also a Topic Area Expert, and is sent to the original journal article author pre-publication. Thus, every single review on our website has been examined by at least three people, and MOST of the time also by the original author of the research. You can’t get much more reliable than that!

What if I have questions or input regarding your procedures?

Please reach out to us! We pride ourselves as being not only one of the most thorough, but also most transparent research resources for SLPs available. After all, why should you trust us to support you if it’s not super clear how we’re doing our research?

Email us any time at communications@theinformedslp.com, or reach out to us through any social media platform.

Our research scouting process is data-driven:

With continued data analysis, many journals on this list end up scouted twice annually. This happens when journals repeatedly publish one or fewer articles relevant to speech–language pathology, across four+ months of scouting. Journals that publish no articles relevant to speech–language pathology over the course of a year are removed from the list entirely.

We also hand-search PubMed and Google Scholar each month for key topics. We search keywords each month as well and have Google Scholar alerts set up to find articles. Over time, these searches give us the data needed to add more journals to the list above. However, we search certain terms every single month, as some topics are published in so many different journals that keyword searches make more sense than adding those journals to our scouting list.