Análise da produção científica nacional fonoaudiológica acerca da linguagem escrita

Abstract

BACKGROUND: National scientific production on written language in the scope of the Speech-Language and Hearing Sciences. AIM: To analyze part of the production of the Brazilian Speech-Language and Hearing Sciences on written language, between the years of 1980 and 2004, considering the following: publication period; distribution per period; types of publication; themes; and authorship. METHOD: This research was developed through the selection and analysis of documents, such as; books, book chapters, and scientific articles published in seven national journals of the Speech-Language and Hearing Sciences (1980 to 2004). RESULTS: Scientific written production found in the studied period consisted of 236 publications. From this total, 3.39% were published during the 80s; 44.1% during the 90s; and 52.5% during the period of 2000-2004. Regarding the type of publication, 18.5% of the scientific production was published as books, 39% as book chapters and 42.5% as research articles. Considering authorship, 42 authors (76.36%) are entailed to institutions of higher education, either as professors or as students, with a higher concentration in the State of São Paulo and a lower concentration in the State of Rio de Janeiro. Overall, the analyzed written productions considered five themes: "Written language disorders" (52%); "Written language appropriation process" (23.5%); "Written language and deafness" (8.90%); "Written language and neurological disorders" (8.22%) and "Written language and school" (7.53%). CONCLUSION: This research recovered part of the scientific production on written language in the field of the Speech-Language and Hearing Sciences. The increase of publications on this theme suggests an improvement of the researches in the field of the Speech-Language and Hearing Sciences and, therefore, points to the importance of studies that analyze trends in our scientific production.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.