ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Assessment of Linguistic Profile of Oral-Language-Proficient Hearing-Impaired Children Using Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals: Fifth Edition (CELF5).
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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.
- Paediatric traumatic brain injury: unique population and unique challenges.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Language and Hidden Emotion Understanding in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children: The Role of Mentalistic Verbs.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesSpecific tests for the assessment of language development and language skills in deaf children are scarce. For this reason, parent inventories and/or standardized tests that are reliable and valid in the hearing population are used. The main aim of this study was to assess the usefulness of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals 5 (CELF5) in determining the language skills of hearing-impaired children in a comprehensive way in comparison to their hearing peers.
methodsThe sample consisted of 70 deaf and 73 hearing children aged 5-11 years. Although the results show statistically significant differences in language skills between deaf and hearing children, deaf children scored around average on 8 of the 12 subtests of the CELF5.
resultsChildren using total communication modality had the highest scores, followed by those using oral language and sign language. The CELF5 subtests showed high internal consistency in the deaf group. A percentile scale was also developed for this population group.
conclusionsThe CELF5 showed to be a reliable test for the assessment of receptive and expressive language in children with deafness who are competent in oral language. However, further research is needed to develop language assessment tests adapted to the deaf population that are sensitive to different communication modalities.
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.