ArticleAutism & developmental language impairments
Reading outcomes in children with developmental language disorder: A person-centered approach.
Article in Autism & developmental language impairments. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Capturing the Heterogeneity of Word Learners by Analyzing Persons.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Visual noise effect on reading in three developmental disorders: ASD, ADHD, and DD.Autism & developmental language impairmentsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Many children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) develop reading difficulties. The purpose of this study is to better understand variation in the reading outcomes of children with DLD using a person-centered approach. Method: 87 monolingual Dutch children diagnosed with DLD performed at ages 5 or 6 years nine tests of nonverbal IQ, oral language proficiency, phonological memory (PM) and executive functioning (EF). Two years later, the same children were tested on single (non-)word reading. Latent profile analyses were conducted to identify profiles based on oral language proficiency, phonological memory and executive functioning at age 5-6 years, which, in turn, were related to nonverbal IQ and to single-word reading two years later. Results: Four profiles were identified and labelled relative to their position within the DLD-sample: 1. Weak performance overall, 2. Strong EF-average language and PM, 3. Mild working memory (WM) deficiencies-average language and PM, 4. Strong development overall. Profiles 1 and 3 had below average nonverbal IQ scores and were associated with low word reading outcomes two years later. Conclusions: Within the group of children with DLD, children with relatively weak oral language, phonological memory and executive functioning, or children with working memory deficiencies are most at risk for developing reading difficulties. The findings support a multiple risk framework and confirm that a person-centered approach is promising in predicting reading outcomes in DLD.
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.