ArticleScientific reports2023
Expressive language sampling and outcome measures for treatment trials in fragile X and down syndromes: composite scores and psychometric properties.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Promoting Research Excellence in Down Syndrome: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of the Trisomy 21 Research Society.Neuromolecular medicine · 2026Article
- Expressive Language Sample Concordance With ADOS-2 Scores: Autism, Down Syndrome, Fragile X Syndrome.American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities · 2026Article
- Short-term and Long-term Stability of the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS-2) Calibrated Comparison Scores (CCS) and Classification Scores in Youth with Down Syndrome or Fragile X Syndrome with Intellectual Disability.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
- A Review of Clinical Trials in Down Syndrome.International review of research in developmental disabilities · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The lack of psychometrically sound outcome measures has been a barrier to evaluating the efficacy of treatments proposed for core symptoms of intellectual disability (ID). Research on Expressive Language Sampling (ELS) procedures suggest it is a promising approach to measuring treatment efficacy. ELS entails collecting samples of a participant's talk in interactions with an examiner that are naturalistic but sufficiently structured to ensure consistency and limit examiner effects on the language produced. In this study, we extended previous research on ELS by analyzing an existing dataset to determine whether psychometrically adequate composite scores reflecting multiple dimensions of language can be derived from ELS procedures administered to 6- to 23-year-olds with fragile X syndrome (n = 80) or Down syndrome (n = 78). Data came from ELS conversation and narration procedures administered twice in a 4-week test-retest interval. We found that several composites emerged from variables indexing syntax, vocabulary, planning processes, speech articulation, and talkativeness, although there were some differences in the composites for the two syndromes. Evidence of strong test-retest reliability and construct validity of two of three composites were obtained for each syndrome. Situations in which the composite scores would be useful in evaluating treatment efficacy are outlined.
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.