ArticleActa paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992)2021
The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2-year-old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems.
Article in Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Screening Tools for Language Disorder.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Validity and feasibility of a predictive language screening tool in 2-year-old children in primary pediatric care.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Editorial: Surveillance of language development in pre-school children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2-year-old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2021Article
- Early Screening for Developmental Language Disorder: Predictive Validity of German Parent Reports.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimA little is known about predictive validity of and professionals' adherence to language screening protocols. This study assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2-year-old children and the effects of protocol deviations by professionals.
methodsA prospective cohort study of 124 children recruited and tested between October 2013 and December 2015. Children were recruited from four well child clinics in urban and rural areas. To validate the screening, we assessed children's language ability with standardised language tests following the 2-year screening and 1 year later. We assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the screening and of protocol deviations.
resultsAt 2 years, the sensitivity and specificity of the language screening were 0.79 and 0.86, and at 3 years 0.82 and 0.74, respectively. Protocol deviations by professionals were rare (7%) and did not significantly affect the validity of the screening.
conclusionThe language screening protocol was valid for detecting current and later language problems. Deviations from the protocol by professionals were rare and did not affect the concurrent nor predictive validity of the protocol. The 2-year language screening supports professionals working in preventive child health care and deserves wider implementation in well child care.
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.