Literature DB >> 10755459

The feasibility of universal screening for primary speech and language delay: findings from a systematic review of the literature.

J Law1, J Boyle, F Harris, A Harkness, C Nye.   

Abstract

This paper reports on a systematic review of the literature commissioned to examine the feasibility of universal screening for speech and language delay. The results, based on an examination of productivity figures, including positive predictive ability and likelihood ratio, indicate that a number of screening tests are adequate. Sensitivity was generally lower than specificity, and study quality was inversely related to both sensitivity and likelihood ratio, suggesting that it is easier to identify accurately children who do not have language and speech problems than those who do. The review concluded that there is insufficient evidence to warrant the introduction of universal screening at this stage. This paper discusses the type of data that would be needed to address this issue further and recommendations are made for alternative approaches to early identification.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10755459     DOI: 10.1017/s0012162200000335

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dev Med Child Neurol        ISSN: 0012-1622            Impact factor:   5.449


  18 in total

Review 1.  How to investigate and manage the child who is slow to speak.

Authors:  Jamiu O Busari; Nielske M Weggelaar
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-01-31

2.  [Fool's gold standards in language screening. Sensitivity and specificity of the Hessian child language screening test (Kindersprachscreening, KiSS)].

Authors:  K Neumann; I Holler-Zittlau; S van Minnen; U Sick; Y Zaretsky; H A Euler
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  Do early lexical skills predict language outcome at 3 years? A longitudinal study of French-speaking children.

Authors:  Tamara Patrucco-Nanchen; Margaret Friend; Diane Poulin-Dubois; Pascal Zesiger
Journal:  Infant Behav Dev       Date:  2019-09-24

4.  [Validity criteria of a short test to assess speech and language competence in 4-year-olds].

Authors:  H A Euler; I Holler-Zittlau; S Minnen; U Sick; W Dux; Y Zaretsky; K Neumann
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  Applying Item Response Theory to the Development of a Screening Adaptation of the Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation-Second Edition.

Authors:  Tim Brackenbury; Michael J Zickar; Benjamin Munson; Holly L Storkel
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-09-18       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Extending use of the NRT to preschool-age children with and without specific language impairment.

Authors:  Patricia Deevy; Lisa Wisman Weil; Laurence B Leonard; Lisa Goffman
Journal:  Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch       Date:  2010-04-26       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Risk for poor performance on a language screening measure for bilingual preschoolers and kindergarteners.

Authors:  Elizabeth D Peña; Ronald B Gillam; Lisa M Bedore; Thomas M Bohman
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2011-08-05       Impact factor: 2.408

8.  A Brief Measure of Language Skills at 3 Years of Age and Special Education Use in Middle Childhood.

Authors:  Laura Lee McIntyre; William E Pelham; Matthew H Kim; Thomas J Dishion; Daniel S Shaw; Melvin N Wilson
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 4.406

9.  [Possibilities and limitations of the early identification of developmental language disorders].

Authors:  K Ullrich; W von Suchodoletz
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 1.284

10.  Language status at age 3: Group and individual prediction from vocabulary comprehension in the second year.

Authors:  Margaret Friend; Erin Smolak; Tamara Patrucco-Nanchen; Diane Poulin-Dubois; Pascal Zesiger
Journal:  Dev Psychol       Date:  2018-10-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.