ArticleDementia & neuropsychologia2025
Assessment of language abilities and functionality in adults and elders with Down syndrome.
Article in Dementia & neuropsychologia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Introduction to the special issue on Down syndrome.Dementia & neuropsychologia · 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
Aging in people with Down syndrome (DS) is often marked by functional decline. People with DS present different degrees of language impairment, which may impact functionality. Objective: To assess language abilities and functionality in older people with DS. Methods: Forty individuals with DS aged 35 years or older were subdivided into literate and non-literate groups. The Arizona Battery for Communication Disorders in Dementia (ABCD), Object and Action Naming Battery (OANB), and Lawton & Brody Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Scale were used for linguistic and functional assessments. Results: The literate group performed better functionally and in all ABCD subdomains (apart from Linguistic Expression) and OANB. There was an association between Word Learning, Repetition, Generative Naming, and functionality in the literate group. In the non-literate group, Word Learning, Object Description, Comparative Questions, and Repetition were associated with total functional scores. Conclusion: Functional performance was associated with different linguistic tasks in the literate (verbal memory and executive functions) and non-literate (verbal memory and lexico-semantic process) groups.
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.