快速互动式语言筛选器对有无发育性语言障碍学龄前儿童分类的准确性

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY Journal of Communication Disorders Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2022.106276
Amy Pace , Maura Curran , Amanda Owen Van Horne , Jill de Villiers , Aquiles Iglesias , Roberta Michnick Golinkoff , Mary S. Wilson , Kathy Hirsh-Pasek
{"title":"快速互动式语言筛选器对有无发育性语言障碍学龄前儿童分类的准确性","authors":"Amy Pace ,&nbsp;Maura Curran ,&nbsp;Amanda Owen Van Horne ,&nbsp;Jill de Villiers ,&nbsp;Aquiles Iglesias ,&nbsp;Roberta Michnick Golinkoff ,&nbsp;Mary S. Wilson ,&nbsp;Kathy Hirsh-Pasek","doi":"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2022.106276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>This research examined the classification accuracy of the Quick Interactive Language Screener (QUILS) for identifying preschool-aged children (3;0 to 6;9) with developmental language disorder (DLD). We present data from two independent samples that varied in prevalence and diagnostic reference standard.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Study 1 included a clinical sample of children (54 with DLD; 13 without) who completed the QUILS and a standardized assessment of expressive grammar (Syntax subtest from the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Norm Referenced; Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–Preschool 2nd Edition; or Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–3 rd Edition). Study 2 included a community sample of children (25 with DLD; 101 without) who completed the QUILS and the Auditory Comprehension subtest of the Preschool Language Scales–5th Edition (PLS-5; <span>Zimmerman et al., 2011</span>). Discriminant analyses were conducted to compare classification accuracy (i.e., sensitivity and specificity) using the normreferenced cut score (&lt; 25th percentile) with empirically derived cut scores.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In Study 1, the QUILS led to low fail rates (i.e., high specificity) in children without impairment and statistically significant group differences as a function of children's clinical status; however, only 65% of children with DLD were accurately identified using the norm-referenced cutoff. In Study 2, 76% of children with DLD were accurately identified at the 25th percentile cutoff and accuracy improved to 84% when an empirically derived cutoff (&lt;32nd percentile) was applied.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Findings support the clinical application of the QUILS as a component of the screening process for identifying the presence or absence of DLD in community samples of preschool-aged children.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49175,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classification accuracy of the Quick Interactive Language Screener for preschool children with and without developmental language disorder\",\"authors\":\"Amy Pace ,&nbsp;Maura Curran ,&nbsp;Amanda Owen Van Horne ,&nbsp;Jill de Villiers ,&nbsp;Aquiles Iglesias ,&nbsp;Roberta Michnick Golinkoff ,&nbsp;Mary S. Wilson ,&nbsp;Kathy Hirsh-Pasek\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2022.106276\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>This research examined the classification accuracy of the Quick Interactive Language Screener (QUILS) for identifying preschool-aged children (3;0 to 6;9) with developmental language disorder (DLD). We present data from two independent samples that varied in prevalence and diagnostic reference standard.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Study 1 included a clinical sample of children (54 with DLD; 13 without) who completed the QUILS and a standardized assessment of expressive grammar (Syntax subtest from the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Norm Referenced; Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–Preschool 2nd Edition; or Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–3 rd Edition). Study 2 included a community sample of children (25 with DLD; 101 without) who completed the QUILS and the Auditory Comprehension subtest of the Preschool Language Scales–5th Edition (PLS-5; <span>Zimmerman et al., 2011</span>). Discriminant analyses were conducted to compare classification accuracy (i.e., sensitivity and specificity) using the normreferenced cut score (&lt; 25th percentile) with empirically derived cut scores.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In Study 1, the QUILS led to low fail rates (i.e., high specificity) in children without impairment and statistically significant group differences as a function of children's clinical status; however, only 65% of children with DLD were accurately identified using the norm-referenced cutoff. In Study 2, 76% of children with DLD were accurately identified at the 25th percentile cutoff and accuracy improved to 84% when an empirically derived cutoff (&lt;32nd percentile) was applied.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Findings support the clinical application of the QUILS as a component of the screening process for identifying the presence or absence of DLD in community samples of preschool-aged children.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49175,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Communication Disorders\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Communication Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992422000946\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992422000946","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本研究考察了快速互动语言筛选器(QUILS)对学龄前儿童(3岁至6岁)发育性语言障碍(DLD)的分类准确性。我们提出的数据来自两个独立的样本,不同的患病率和诊断参考标准。方法研究1纳入了一组儿童临床样本(54例DLD;13名未完成QUILS和表达性语法的标准化评估(语言变异诊断评估的语法子测试-规范参考;结构化摄影表达语言测试(学前第二版)或结构化摄影表达语言测试(第三版)。研究2包括社区儿童样本(25例DLD;101名未完成《幼儿语言量表-第五版》(PLS-5)的QUILS和听觉理解子测试者;Zimmerman et al., 2011)。采用标准参照cut评分(<第25百分位),根据经验得出的分数。结果在研究1中,QUILS导致无损伤儿童的失败率低(即高特异性),并且作为儿童临床状态的函数,组间差异具有统计学意义;然而,使用标准参考截止值,只有65%的DLD儿童被准确识别。在研究2中,76%的DLD儿童在第25百分位数的截止点被准确识别,当应用经验推导的截止点(<32百分位数)时,准确率提高到84%。结论:研究结果支持QUILS作为筛查过程的一个组成部分,用于识别社区学龄前儿童样本中DLD的存在或不存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Classification accuracy of the Quick Interactive Language Screener for preschool children with and without developmental language disorder

Introduction

This research examined the classification accuracy of the Quick Interactive Language Screener (QUILS) for identifying preschool-aged children (3;0 to 6;9) with developmental language disorder (DLD). We present data from two independent samples that varied in prevalence and diagnostic reference standard.

Methods

Study 1 included a clinical sample of children (54 with DLD; 13 without) who completed the QUILS and a standardized assessment of expressive grammar (Syntax subtest from the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Norm Referenced; Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–Preschool 2nd Edition; or Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–3 rd Edition). Study 2 included a community sample of children (25 with DLD; 101 without) who completed the QUILS and the Auditory Comprehension subtest of the Preschool Language Scales–5th Edition (PLS-5; Zimmerman et al., 2011). Discriminant analyses were conducted to compare classification accuracy (i.e., sensitivity and specificity) using the normreferenced cut score (< 25th percentile) with empirically derived cut scores.

Results

In Study 1, the QUILS led to low fail rates (i.e., high specificity) in children without impairment and statistically significant group differences as a function of children's clinical status; however, only 65% of children with DLD were accurately identified using the norm-referenced cutoff. In Study 2, 76% of children with DLD were accurately identified at the 25th percentile cutoff and accuracy improved to 84% when an empirically derived cutoff (<32nd percentile) was applied.

Conclusions

Findings support the clinical application of the QUILS as a component of the screening process for identifying the presence or absence of DLD in community samples of preschool-aged children.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Communication Disorders
Journal of Communication Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
71
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Communication Disorders publishes original articles on topics related to disorders of speech, language and hearing. Authors are encouraged to submit reports of experimental or descriptive investigations (research articles), review articles, tutorials or discussion papers, or letters to the editor ("short communications"). Please note that we do not accept case studies unless they conform to the principles of single-subject experimental design. Special issues are published periodically on timely and clinically relevant topics.
期刊最新文献
Benefits of speech recognition in noise using remote microphones for people with typical hearing. Variability of theory of mind versus pragmatic ability in typical and atypical development Self-inefficacy's impact on well-being indices in students self-identifying with cluttering characteristics Lived experiences of children who stutter in their own voices Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1