ArticleLearning and individual differences2016
Language development in rural and urban Russian-speaking children with and without developmental language disorder.
Article in Learning and individual differences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders in children from the rural population of Oaxaca evaluated by means of the child development evaluation test].Revista de neurologia · 2023Article
- [Prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders in children from the rural population of Oaxaca evaluated by means of the Child Development Evaluation test].Revista de neurologia · 2023Article
- Measurement of expressive vocabulary in school-age children: Development and application of the Kilifi Naming Test (KNT).Applied neuropsychology. ChildArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Using a newly developed Assessment of the Development of Russian Language (ORRIA), we investigated differences in language development between rural vs. urban Russian-speaking children (n = 100 with a mean age of 6.75) subdivided into groups with and without developmental language disorders. Using classical test theory and item response theory approaches, we found that while ORRIA displayed overall satisfactory psychometric properties, several of its items showed differential item functioning favoring rural children, and several others favoring urban children. After the removal of these items, rural children significantly underperformed on ORRIA compared to urban children. The urbanization factor did not significantly interact with language group. We discuss the latter finding in the context of the multiple additive risk factors for language development and emphasize the need for future studies of the mechanisms that underlie these influences and the implications of these findings for our understanding of the etiological architecture of children's language development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.