Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42500845›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of language & communication disorders

Combining Nonword and Sentence Repetition to Identify Developmental Language Disorder.

Giang T Pham, Ngoc Do, Michelle N Ramos, Kerry Danahy Ebert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of language & communication disorders. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Giang T PhamSchool of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5895-0365
Ngoc DoSchool of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8220-2045
Michelle N RamosSchool of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3606-4463
Kerry Danahy EbertDepartment of Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7607-9742

Funding

Clinical markers of DLD in bilingual and monolingual Vietnamese children - Diversity Supplement L. DangR01DC019335 · NIDCD · SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Giang Thuy Pham · 2021 to 2026
$1.9M
NIDCD (National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders)NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC019335NIH HHS R01DC019335
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNonword repetition and sentence repetition have been useful in identification of developmental language disorder (DLD). Each task has demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity, though their diagnostic accuracy has varied across children's ages, specific measures, and languages. These tasks tap into different underlying weaknesses associated with DLD, but few studies have examined the diagnostic utility of combining them.

aimsThe present study compares the diagnostic accuracy of each task-nonword repetition and sentence repetition-to that of combining the two tasks in order to evaluate their utility in DLD identification. METHOD AND PROCEDURES: Participants were 196 monolingual Vietnamese speakers, ages 4-6, living in the northern region of Vietnam. As part of a larger study, participants were divided into typical development (TD: n = 168) and DLD (n = 28). We used logistic regression with ROC curves to empirically derive cutpoints and calculate diagnostic accuracy measures for each task separately and in combination. OUTCOMES AND

resultsNonword repetition and sentence repetition each showed adequate sensitivity (NWR: 89.3%; SR: 82.1%) but unacceptable specificity (NWR: 41.1%; SR: 76.2%). The combination of tasks showed adequate sensitivity (85.7%) and specificity (81.6%) as well as informative positive (4.65) and negative (0.18) likelihood ratios. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Nonword and sentence repetition may tap different underlying weaknesses and together provide useful diagnostic information to accurately identify DLD in Vietnamese monolingual children, ages 4 to 6. The next step is to translate research findings to practice by further validating the combined model and automate procedures for ease of scoring and interpretation. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Nonword repetition and sentence repetition have contributed to the accurate identification of Developmental Language Disorder (DLD). However, the diagnostic accuracy of each task varies across ages and languages, and their combined effect is understudied. Because each task measures different weaknesses associated with DLD, combining them could improve identification accuracy. What does this study add to existing knowledge This study examined whether combining nonword and sentence repetition improves DLD identification. Within a group of 196 4- to 6-year-old children in Vietnam, we found that the combination of tasks was better at identifying DLD than each task alone. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Combining nonword and sentence repetition holds promise for accurately and quickly identifying DLD. Next steps are to further validate this combination of tasks and to translate research findings into clinical practice.

Indexed as

Child LanguageLanguage Development DisordersLanguage TestsChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityVietnamdiagnostic accuracydiscriminant function analysisDLD identificationsensitivity/specificityVietnamese

Identifiers

PMID42500845
PMCPMC13576501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.