Development and Validation of a Language Screening for Implementation in Pre-School Settings (original) (raw)
Related papers
Frontiers in Pediatrics, 2022
BackgroundThere is a lack of accurate and practicable instruments for identifying language disorders in multilingual children in pre-school settings.ObjectiveTo develop a language screening instrument for pre-school children who are growing up with German as their second language.DesignAfter the development and initial validation of a language screening tool, the new instrument (LOGiK-S) was administered to three cohorts of children (2014, 2015, 2017) with a non-German first language attending a variety of public pre-schools in Upper Austria. The screening instrument measures expressive and receptive grammatical skills in German. The final validation study included the results for 270 children for the screening measure and reference tests. A combination of a standardized comprehensive language test of grammatical skills developed for children acquiring German as a second language and a test of expressive vocabulary with the use of specific cutoffs for second language learners was ap...
Acta Paediatrica, 2019
Aim: We examined if routine Swedish language screening for developmental language disorder (DLD) carried out at three years of age could be performed as effectively six months earlier. Methods: This study observed 105 monolingual Swedish-speaking children (53% boys) aged 29-31 months at three Swedish child health centres. We compared their ability to combine three words, as per the existing protocol, and two words. They also underwent a comprehension task. Speech and language pathologists clinically assessed the children for DLD and their results were compared with the nurse-led screening. Results: The results for the three-word and two-word criterion were: sensitivity (100% versus 91%) specificity (81% versus 91%), positive predictive (38% versus 56%) and negative predictive value (100% versus 99%). The three-word criterion identified 29 children with possible DLD, including 11 cases later confirmed, and the two-word criterion identified 18 possible cases, including 10 confirmed cases. DLD was overrepresented in the 10% of children who did not cooperate with the nurse-led screening.
Universal language development screening: comparative performance of two questionnaires
BMJ Paediatrics Open, 2022
Background and objectiveLow language ability in early childhood is a strong predictor of later psychopathology as well as reduced school readiness, lower educational attainment, employment problems and involvement with the criminal justice system. Assessment of early language development is universally offered in many countries, but there has been little evaluation of assessment tools. We planned to compare the screening performance of two commonly used language assessment instruments.MethodsA pragmatic diagnostic accuracy study was carried out in five areas of England comparing the performance of two screening tools (Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) and Sure Start Language Measure (SSLM)) against a reference test (Preschool Language Scale, 5th edition).ResultsResults were available for 357 children aged 23–30 months. The ASQ Communication Scale using optimal cut-off values had a sensitivity of 0.55, a specificity of 0.95 and positive and negative predictive values of 0.53 and 0....
Frontiers in Pediatrics, 2022
Objective: To assess the predictive validity and feasibility of the newly developed language screening tool, SPES-(Sprachentwicklungsscreening), for-year-old children in pediatric primary care. Methods: A prospective cohort study recruited , non-selected Germanspeaking children undergoing a regular well-baby checkup at the age of years. Thirty primary care pediatricians spread over urban and rural areas screened the children using a short parent-reported questionnaire and direct assessment of word comprehension. To validate the screening tool, language skills were assessed using a standardized language screening tool in the complete sample year later. Data of a random sample of children were analyzed. Feasibility of the screening tool was evaluated using questionnaires completed by the participating pediatricians. Results: The new screening tool, SPES-, demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy with AUC (Area under the Roc Curve) of. , a sensitivity of. , and specificity of. , using a parent-reported questionnaire (expressive vocabulary, two-word combinations, parental concerns) as stage , followed by a stage direct assessment of word comprehension by the pediatrician. The second stage was restricted to children who failed the parental screening. The screening identified children with high, moderate, and low risk of significant language deficits (SLD) at the age of years, permitting tailored followup assessment and parental counseling. Practicality and acceptability of the screening were mostly rated as high. Pediatricians regarded the availability of follow-up diagnostic services and parent guidance as most important for a general implementation of the new instrument. Conclusion: The language screening tool, SPES-, was valid for the identification of significant language deficits year later, and considered as feasible within primary pediatric care.
Frontiers in Pediatrics, 2021
Objective:The study was aimed at evaluating the validity and feasibility of SPES-3 (Sprachentwicklungsscreening), a language screening in 3-year-old children within the constraints of regular preventive medical check-ups.Methods:A four-component screening measure including parental reports on the child's expressive vocabulary and grammar based on the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory and pediatrician-administered standardized assessments of noun plurals and sentence comprehension was used in a sample of 2,044 consecutively seen children in 30 pediatric offices. One-hundred forty-four children (70 who failed and 74 who passed the screener) comprised the validation sample and also underwent follow-up gold standard assessment. To avoid verification and spectrum bias multiple imputation of missing diagnosis for children who did not undergo gold standard assessment was used. Independent diagnoses by two experts blinded to the screening results were considered gold standar...
Detecting language problems: accuracy of five language screening instruments in preschool children
Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 2007
To identify a simple and effective screening instrument for language delays in 3-year-old children the reliability, validity, and accuracy of five screening instruments were examined. A postal questionnaire sent to parents of 11 423 children included the Dutch version of the General Language Screen (GLS), the Van Wiechen (VW) items, the Language Screening Instrument for 3-to 4-year-olds, consisting of a parent form (LSI-PF) and a child test (LSI-CT), and parents' own judgement of their child's language development on a visual analogue scale (VAS). The response rate was 78% or 8877 children. Reliability (internal consistency) was found to be acceptable (α α=0.67-0.72) for all instruments. Significant correlations between the screening instruments (r=0.29-0.55, p<0.01) indicated good concurrent validity. Accuracy was estimated by the sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves against two reference tests based on parent report and specialists' judgement. If the test would classify approximately 5% of the population as screen-positive, the mean sensitivity was 50%; assigning between 20% and 30% of the population as screen-positive, the mean sensitivity was 77%. The sensitivity was lowest for the LSI-CT (range 43-62%), whereas short instruments like the LSI-PF, VW, and the one-item VAS exhibited high levels of sensitivity (range 50-86%). The area under the ROC curves, ranged from 0.75 to 0.87. Apparently, short and simple parent report instruments like the LSI-PF and the one-item VAS perform remarkably well in detecting language delays in preschool children.
Concurrent and Predictive Validity of an Early Language Screening Program
Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 1998
The efficacy of screening 2-year-old children for language delay using a parentreport questionnaire was investigated in three studies. The Language Development Survey (Rescorla, 1989) was mailed to 650 families at the time of their child's second birthday. Fifty-three percent of the surveys received by parents were completed and returned. Screening outcomes were then compared, in doubleblind fashion, with the results of comprehensive clinical evaluations at ages 2 (N = 64) and 3 (N = 36). Parents' report of the size of their children's expressive vocabularies was highly correlated with clinical language measures at age 2. Children who screened positive performed significantly poorer than children who screened negative on standardized language tests and on measures taken from spontaneous conversation. The screening program demonstrated excellent sensitivity and specificity for identifying language delay at age 2 but somewhat lower levels for predicting developmental status one year later.
Validation of the Early Language Scale
European Journal of Pediatrics
The aim of this study was to assess the criterion validity of a new screening instrument, the Early Language Scale (ELS), for the identification of young children at risk for developmental language disorder (DLD), and to determine optimal ageadjusted cutoff scores. We recruited a community-based sample of 265 children aged 1 to 6 years of age. Parents of these children responded on the ELS, a 26-item "yes-no" questionnaire. The children were assessed with extended language tests (language comprehension, word production, sentence production, communication). A composite score out of these tests (two tests below-1 SD or one below − 1.5 SD) was used as reference standard. We assessed the validity of the ELS, measured by sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and AUC. The optimal sensitivity/specificity age-dependent cutoff ELS score was at 15th percentile. Sensitivity and specificity were 0.62 and 0.93, respectively. Positive predictive value was moderate (0.53), negative predictive value was high (0.95), the positive likelihood ratio was 9.16, and negative likelihood ratio was 0.41. The area under the ROC curve was 0.88. The items covered the increasing language development for the ages from 1 to 6. Conclusion: The ELS is a valid instrument to identify children with DLD covering an age range of 1 to 6 years in communitybased settings. What is Known: • Early identification and treatment of developmental language disorders can reduce negative effects on children's emotional functioning, academic success, and social relationships. • Short, validated language screening instruments that cover the full age range of early childhood language development lack. What is New: • The 26-item Early Language Scale (ELS) is a valid instrument to identify children at risk for developmental language disorder in well-child care and early educational settings among Dutch children aged 1-6 years.