Fact · Accessibility and health
8peer-reviewed studies
A 2022 scoping review of speech-to-text for secondary pupils with learning difficulties found only eight peer-reviewed studies and five grey-literature publications that met its criteria, covering January 2000 to April 2022.
Checked against its source on October 16, 2026
In the source's own words
“Eight peer-revied studies and five publications of grey literature were found to meet the inclusion criteria; two studies employed experimental designs, four employed quasi-experimental designs and seven employed explorative designs.”
A scoping review on the use of speech-to-text technology for adolescents with learning difficulties in secondary education, Marianne Engen Matre and David Lansing Cameron, Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 2022, Abstract, Results.
Open the original (DOI 10.1080/17483107.2022.2149865)- What it measures
- The misspelling 'peer-revied' is in the original abstract. Six of the studies treated speech-to-text as a compensatory aid for poor writing, and two as a way to improve writing and reading skills overall.
- What it does not show
- Limited to secondary school pupils aged 12 to 18 and to three databases (ERIC, PsycINFO and Scopus). Studies of university students and younger children are outside its scope.