ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026
Childhood motor speech disorders: who to prioritise for genetic testing.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. 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.
- Coding or non-coding? The question behind sequencing.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aetiology of childhood motor speech disorders of dysarthria and apraxia has been poorly understood. Recent evidence suggests a moderate genetic contribution for these rare and severe speech disorders. To date, however, no studies have examined genetic diagnostic yield for childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) and dysarthria in a clinical setting. Here, we used a clinically accredited genomics pipeline to investigate genetic diagnostic yield and variables predictive of a genetic diagnosis in a tertiary hospital speech clinic. A cohort of 153 children (range 2;7-16;5 years, 42 female) ascertained for motor speech disorder were assessed by a clinical geneticist and speech pathologist and underwent chromosomal microarray, Fragile X and exome sequencing. Odds ratios identified predictors of genetic diagnosis. 44/153 (29%, 15 female) had pathogenic variants (30 de novo), encompassing monogenic conditions (n = 35) and copy number variants (n = 9) across 38 distinct disorders. Delayed walking, fine and gross motor disorder, receptive language impairment and/or cognitive impairment, and dysmorphism were associated with a genetic diagnosis. The presence of CAS and dysarthria was more commonly associated with a genetic diagnosis than CAS alone. Autism spectrum disorder was less commonly associated with a genetic diagnosis. No child had a Fragile X diagnosis. The clinical genetic diagnostic yield for motor speech disorders is comparable to epilepsy and cerebral palsy, conditions where genetic testing is routine in most centres, unlike for motor speech disorders. Children with motor speech disorder with co-occurring motor, language and/or learning deficits, should be prioritised for genomic testing.
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.