ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023
Differences in pragmatic communication skills of adults with intellectual disabilities and dual diagnoses.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal assessment of pragmatic and cognitive decay in healthy aging, and interplay with subjective cognitive decline and cognitive reserve.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Communicative Profiles of Children with Developmental Delay Compared to Age- or Language-Matched Typically Developing Peers.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Pragmatics includes a set of skills related to language structure and meaning that allow the speaker to use the language appropriately and in accordance with different communication situations. The aim of this research was to determine the differences in pragmatic communication skills of adults with intellectual disabilities, dual diagnoses, and typical development, and to determine the effects of gender, age, the level of intellectual functioning and speech comprehension on their achievements on two assessment instruments. Methods: The sample included 180 adults (60 typically developing participants, 60 with intellectual disabilities, and 60 participants with dual diagnoses). We used two instruments to assess pragmatic communication skills - Communication Checklist - Adult, CC-A, and the Assessment Battery for Communication, ABaCo. In order to test the differences between the three groups of participants, we used canonical discriminant analysis. Results: Discriminant analysis revealed two significant canonical functions. Function one (speech comprehension and the level of intellectual disability, social engagement, and paralinguistic scale) differentiates between typically developing participants and participants with dual diagnoses the most. The second canonical function (language structure, linguistic scale, paralinguistic scale, extralinguistic scale, and context scale) differentiates between participants with intellectual disabilities and participants with dual diagnoses the most. According to the results, age did not affect pragmatic achievements. Discussion: Pragmatic skills are very complex, and different instruments measure different dimensions of these abilities. The results of this research lead to the conclusion that we can differentiate between the pragmatic abilities of typically developing people, people with intellectual disabilities, and those with dual diagnoses with the help of the ABaCo battery and the CC-A questionnaire.
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.