What question did this study set out to answer?

June 20, 2026

Language-Common and Language-Specific Error Patterns in Children With Speech Sound Disorders: A Systematic Review

Key Points

This review aims to analyze error patterns in children with speech sound disorders across different languages.
Conducted comprehensive searches in multiple databases including PubMed and Scopus.
Included 28 studies on children with phonological or articulation SSDs that reported quantitative error analyses.
Evaluated methodological quality using a 16-item framework.
Reported PCC values ranged from 65.0% to 85.0%, indicating mild to moderate impairment.
Substitution errors were the most common, followed by omissions and distortions across languages.
Both common and unique phonological processes were identified, highlighting cross-linguistic variations.

Abstract

Objectives: This systematic review synthesized cross-linguistic evidence on speech error patterns in children with speech sound disorders (SSDs), focusing on percent consonants correct (PCC), SODA (substitution, omission, distortion, and addition) error profiles, and phonological processes, as well as factors contributing to variations in error patterns. Method: Comprehensive searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL Ultimate, Scopus, Web of Science, and Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eligible studies included empirical research on children with phonological, articulation, or functional SSDs that reported quantitative error analyses. Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality, evaluated using a 16-item framework, ranged from 50.0% to 100.0% ( M = 82.7%). Results: The 28 studies spanned nine languages (English, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, French, Turkish, Korean, and Chinese), including three dialects each of Spanish and Chinese and two dialects of Portuguese. Reported PCC values (typically 65.0%–85.0%) indicated predominantly mild–moderate to moderate impairment. Substitution errors were the most prevalent across languages, followed by omissions and distortions. Both language-common and language-specific phonological processes were documented. Discussion: The findings indicate that PCC is generally comparable across languages, whereas SODA error profiles and phonological processes reflect both cross-linguistic similarities and language-specific characteristics. Phonological processes, in particular, exhibit greater cross-linguistic variation. Collectively, these results emphasize the need for culturally responsive diagnostic practices and highlight the importance of developing cross-linguistic frameworks to guide the assessment of SSDs. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.32649549

اسأل الذكاء الاصطناعي

Bookmark