The interesting questions are still ahead of us.
The most-cited studies are 25–30 years old, use protocols that don't match contemporary practice, and tend to be cited as if they are the last word. They aren't.
We welcome rigorous, well-designed research — including studies that challenge our framework. The questions we most want answered are the ones that would meaningfully shape practice: who benefits, under what conditions, measured how, with what supports, over what time horizon.
Research framework
A shared, interdisciplinary research agenda across S2C, RPM, FC, and Supported Typing — outcome signals, ecological validity, multimodal communication, and evidence framed for educators, physicians, and civil rights attorneys.
Read →Open research questions
Motor-planning correlates, predictors of fading, eye-tracking, EEG, intervention dosage, partner effects, and longitudinal outcome studies that don't yet exist.
Read →Outcome signals worth collecting
What we can already see in the field — and what a serious outcomes-data effort would need to look like to support billing-code and reimbursement work.
Read →