• Social-ecological framing of AAC outcomes highlights family involvement, device prescription, and cross-context maintenance, supported by early family-centered studies [1], trends on family impact and support for multiple contexts [9], and reciprocal environment considerations shaping candidacy [8].

• Methodological scrutiny of who counts as a subject in AAC research, arguing against overgeneralization from nondisabled subjects and urging representativeness and context-aware designs [5], with debates on subject selection and external validity [13], and related guidance on research priorities [17].

• Professional practice patterns reveal variable knowledge, training, and service provision for AAC among SLPs and educators, across national surveys and school-based training evaluations [6], [3], [14], with application to autism contexts in practice [15].

• A central theoretical pattern treats communicative competence and empowerment as outcomes of AAC use, integrating user-perceived competence with system design and social interaction across cerebral palsy and autism contexts [4], [11], [20], [12].

• Early language development and candidacy for AAC emphasize reciprocal influences between children and their environments and naturalistic language use; studies on generic talk and transactional communication inform selection criteria and design considerations for AAC tools [8], [19], [7].