Follow-up of children attending infant language units: outcomes at 11 years of age

Language growth in verbal autistic children from 5 to 11 years

To examine predictors and growth in language for verbal autistic and non-autistic children with/without low language from 4 to 11 years. Receptive and expressive language trajectories were compared in a community sample of 1026 children at ages 5, 7, and 11 years, across four groups: two autistic groups; one with and one without low language; and two non-autistic groups; one with and one without low language. Groups were delineated on baseline assessment at 4 years. Non-autistic and autistic children with low language had lower mean expressive language scores than the non-autistic typical language group (22.26 and 38.53 units lower, respectively, p < 0.001), yet demonstrated faster language growth across 5 to 11 years (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively). Both groups without low language had similar mean expressive language scores (p = 0.864) and a comparable rate of growth (p = 0.645). Language at 4 years was the only consistent predictor of language at 11 years for autistic children. Results were similar for receptive language in all analyses except there was no significant difference in rate of progress (slope) for the autistic with low language group compared with the typical language group (p = 0.272). Findings suggest early language ability, rather than a diagnosis of autism, is key to determining language growth and outcomes at 11 years in verbal children. Furthermore, children with low language showed developmental acceleration compared with same age peers.

Longitudinal Relationships Between Reading Abilities, Phonological Awareness, Language Abilities and Executive Functions: Comparison of Low Risk Preterm and Full-Term Children

Different investigations have found that very or extremely (high risk) preterm children show global or specific difficulties in phonological awareness (PA) and reading abilities. Do low risk preterm children, however, exhibit this pattern? Phonological awareness has been considered an important predictor of literacy. Certain executive functions (EFs), and language abilities in turn, have been found to predict PA. The aims of this study are (1) to compare reading abilities of low risk preterm children of different gestational age (GA) groups to those of full-term children, (2) to compare the performance of low risk preterm children of different GA groups to that of full-term children in different EFs, language measures and PA, and (3) to perform a path analysis in order to test a longitudinal model of the relationships between EFs, language abilities, PA and reading. The participants were 108 low risk 4- year-old preterm children, classified into 3 groups of different GAs, and 34 full-term children. The children’s EFs (rapid automatized naming task (RAN), working memory, and inhibition) were assessed at 4 and 5 years of age. Vocabulary comprehension, morphosyntactic production and grammar reception were assessed when the children were 5 years of age, as well as phonemic awareness and syllabic awareness. Finally, reading abilities were assessed when the children were 9 years old. No significant difference between gestational age groups was found on any of the measures taken on EFs, language abilities, phonological awareness, or reading abilities. The path analysis model demonstrates the direct effect of working memory, certain linguistic skills governed by rules (grammar, morphology) and phonological awareness on reading abilities at 9 years of age. The model also shows the mediating role that PA has on the relationship between EFs and language abilities with reading abilities.

Language, literacy and cognitive skills of young adults with developmental language disorder (DLD)

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence concerning the longer term language, literacy and cognitive skills of young adults with developmental language disorder (DLD). Studies that exist suggest continuing difficulties with language and reading, but abilities may change over time.

AIMS

This study aimed to examine the language, literacy and cognitive skills of young adults with and without DLD.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Data were used from the Manchester Language Study data set which was collected from a group of young adults with DLD (recruited originally at 7 years of age from language units-specialist educational resource bases). Participants were assessed on their language, literacy and cognitive functioning when they were aged 24. A comparison group of age-matched peers (AMPs; also 24 years old) were also assessed. For language and cognition, change in scores between 16 and 24 years was also available for analysis. Finally, self-rated measures of literacy difficulties were taken at 24 years for functional reading and writing.

OUTCOME & RESULTS

The results indicate that the young people with DLD in this sample continue to perform more poorly as a group on formal oral and written language tests. A small but significant minority of young adults with DLD also report functional reading and writing difficulties compared with AMPs despite reporting reading as often as their peer group. Compared with scores at 16 years of age, this subsample now appears to show slightly less risk of non-verbal IQ difficulties, showing small but significant 'catch-up' to AMPs.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

These preliminary data suggest that at least some individuals with DLD experience marked linguistic difficulties in adulthood, and that the pathways of language, literacy and cognition are not entirely parallel for this group. Continued support and awareness of challenges for young adults with DLD may be useful. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject It is known that DLD is long term and persists into adulthood. There has recently been a body of work reporting on the well-being of this population, as well as their employment, financial status and driving ability. However, there is very little information about language, literacy and cognitive skills beyond school age. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study presents data on language, literacy and cognition from a large cohort of young adults with DLD and their AMPs. In this sample, a large proportion of participants score low on language, with fewer scoring as impaired on literacy and cognition. A significant minority reports difficulties in functional reading. Preliminary analysis appears to suggest that while language development remains depressed, non-verbal cognitive skills show some catch up over time. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Increased awareness and continued support for language, literacy and cognition may be useful for young adults with DLD.

Psycholinguistic and socioemotional characteristics of young offenders: Do language abilities and gender matter?

PURPOSE

Previous research demonstrates an association between developmental language disorder (DLD) and criminal offending. International research also implicates alexithymia as being over-represented in forensic samples. This study provides a comprehensive examination of the psycholinguistic and socioemotional profiles of males and females in the youth justice system, with a focus on first-time entrants. In the context of restorative justice (RJ) underpinning youth justice disposals, this allows for informed intervention and identifies those who may be compromised in their ability to effectively engage in certain interventions.

METHODS

Participants (N = 145) from a triage centre and youth offending teams, with a mean age of 15.8, completed a range of standardized psycholinguistic assessments considering non-verbal IQ, expressive and receptive language measures, and literacy. Additionally, socioemotional measures completed included The Alexithymia Scale and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Developmental language disorder was present in 87 participants. Except for the emotional score, no statistically significant gender differences were found. The mean language scores for the DLD group were more than 2.25 standard deviations below the normative mean, and they demonstrated greater literacy difficulties. A high proportion of the group met the criteria for alexithymia/possible alexithymia (60%), and this was not associated with DLD.

CONCLUSIONS

High prevalence values for DLD and socioemotional difficulties, not generally gender-specific, were found. These difficulties have the possibility to compromise a young person's ability to engage in rehabilitative strategies. Language assessment and identification of difficulties, especially DLD, upon entry to the youth justice service, would assist when planning interventions.

Deficient Explicit Access to Phonological Representations Explains Phonological Fluency Difficulties in Greek Children With Dyslexia and/or Developmental Language Disorder

It is well-established that children with dyslexia and/or Developmental Language Disorder (hereafter children with DDLD) perform poorly on phonological tasks compared to typically developing (TD) children. However, there has been some debate as to whether their phonological deficit arises directly from an impairment in phonological representations, or instead from deficient access to (intact) phonological representations. This study tested the Degraded Phonological Representations Hypothesis and the Deficient Phonological Access Hypothesis using a task that is not often used with children with DDLD, namely phonological fluency. Both hypotheses predict that children with DDLD will retrieve fewer items than their TD peers in the phonological fluency task. However, while the Degraded Phonological Representations Hypothesis predicts smaller clusters of phonologically related items in children with DDLD, the Deficient Phonological Access Hypothesis predicts that the two groups will not differ in cluster size. How phonological fluency performance related to children's language, literacy, and phonological skills was investigated. Further, the specificity of a phonological fluency deficit in children with DDLD was tested using a nonverbal (design) fluency task. Sixty-six children with DDLD aged 7-12 years and 83 TD children aged 6-12 years, all monolingual Greek speakers, were tested on three phonological fluency categories, on nonverbal IQ, language, literacy, and phonological tasks, and on a design fluency task. The DDLD group produced significantly fewer correct responses and fewer switches compared to the TD group, but the two groups showed similar clustering and average cluster size. After controlling for age, children's language, literacy, and phonological skills significantly predicted the number of correct responses produced. The two groups did not differ significantly on the number of unique designs generated in the design fluency task. Furthermore, children with DDLD showed poorer phonological fluency performance relative to their TD peers even after design fluency performance was controlled, demonstrating the specificity of their phonological fluency deficit. This study adds to the theoretical debate on the locus of the phonological deficit in dyslexia and DLD. The findings support the hypothesis that the phonological deficit in dyslexia and DLD lies in deficient explicit access to intact phonological representations.

Terminological debate over language impairment in children: forward movement and sticking points

BACKGROUND

There is no agreed terminology for describing childhood language problems. In this special issue Reilly et al. and Bishop review the history of the most widely used label, 'specific language impairment' (SLI), and discuss the pros and cons of various terms. Commentators from a range of backgrounds, in terms of both discipline and geographical background, were then invited to respond to each lead article.

AIMS

To summarize the main points made by the commentators and identify (1) points of consensus and disagreement, (2) issues for debate including the drivers for change and diagnostic criteria, and (3) the way forward.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

There was some common ground, namely that the current situation is not tenable because it impedes clinical and research progress and impacts on access to services. There were also wide-ranging disagreements about which term should be adopted. However, before debating the broad diagnostic label it is essential to consider the diagnostic criteria and the systems used to classify childhood language problems. This is critical in order to facilitate communication between and among clinicians and researchers, across sectors (in particular health and education), with the media and policy-makers and with families and individuals who have language problems. We suggest four criteria be taken into account when establishing diagnostic criteria, including: (1) the features of language, (2) the impact on functioning and participation, (3) the presence/absence of other impairments, and (4) the language trajectory or pathway and age of onset. In future, these criteria may expand to include the genetic and neural markers for language problems. Finally, there was overarching agreement about the need for an international and multidisciplinary forum to move this debate forward. The purpose would be to develop consensus regarding the diagnostic criteria and diagnostic label for children with language problems. This process should include canvassing the views of families and people with language problems as well as the views of policy-makers.