ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2026
Developmental Sentence Scoring for Preschool Language Sample Analysis: A Psychometric Update.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe sought to validate the ability of Developmental Sentence Scoring (DSS) to distinguish age and diagnostic category in a large, open-access corpus of American English-speaking adult-child language interactions at TalkBank.org. We additionally sought to identify whether subscales differed by age and diagnostic category, to explore the potential for adapting DSS to shorter language samples.
methodWe utilized data from 501 children (ages 2-6 years; 50-utterance sample criterion) and 842 children (25-utterance sample criterion) as well as the open-access DSS utility in Computerized Language Analysis to analyze growth in DSS total and subscale scores and distinguish typical- and late-talker grammatical profiles.
resultsDSS total scores were most informative at younger ages; scores of typically developing (TD) children and children with a history of late talking converged over time. The most sensitive subscale was Main Verbs (MV). Shorter samples (25 utterances) were generally as informative as longer ones. Scores derived from our analyses were generally much higher than those reported by Lee (1974). DISCUSSION: Shorter samples (25 utterances) are as informative as longer ones for both diagnostic and therapy planning purposes. Beyond the MV subscale, DSS may have greater utility in identifying therapy intervention targets than in diagnosing language delay. Finally, use of the original percentile scores for the DSS reported by Lee (1974) may underidentify children whose language lags significantly behind that of TD peers. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.30907109.
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.