Survey of Publications for Parents of Cleft Palate Children: A Preliminary Report

Abstract

A number of publications written for parents of cleft palate children are available. These publications are designed to provide basic information about clefts, associated problems, methods of treatment, prognosis, and psychological implications for parents and children. Wylie and McWilliams (22, 23) have suggested that it would be of value to " consumer test " these publications, i.e., ascertain how the parents view the publications. Because speech pathologists, among others, frequently recommend such readings for parents, it may also be desirable to learn how they evaluate the quality of these publications. Thus, this study was a preliminary attempt to collect information from parents and speech pathologists about their views on the quality of available publications. Procedure Eight different booklets and pamphlets were selected for evaluation by parents and speech pathologists. The publications included were readily available to the experimenter and were frequently mentioned in the literature. Their titles appear in Table 1. All of the publications were submitted to 12 parents of cleft palate children ranging in age from 18 months to 13 years. The parents were all members of a parent group. A second group of readers included 20 undergraduate students in speech pathology, none of whom had had any special training in or experience with cleft palate problems. A third group of readers consisted of 12 speech pathologists who held Texas Education Agency (T.E.A.) certification in speech therapy, had completed a graduate course in cleft palate rehabilitation, and had had clinical experience with cleft palate individuals. Each reader was asked to read each of the eight publications and to assign to it one of seven possible ratings including: (7) superior, (6) excellent, (5) good, (4) average, (3) poor, (2) very poor, (1) worthless. These were to be overall evaluations, but the participants were asked to keep in mind such criteria as organization, adequacy of coverage, accuracy, currency, simplicity of language, appropriateness of vocabulary, ease of understanding, and attractiveness of presentation. No attempt was made to weight these criteria. They were merely guidelines for the evaluators. Results EVALUATIONS. For seven of the eight publications, there was essentially no difference in the evaluations provided by parents, student speech pathologists, 57