Sharpening Our Tools: A Systematic Review to Identify Diagnostically Accurate Language Sample Measures.

PURPOSE: This systematic review provides a comprehensive summary of the diagnostic accuracy of English language sample analysis (LSA) measures for the identification of developmental language disorder. METHOD: An electronic database search was conducted to identify English publications reporting empirical data on the diagnostic accuracy of English LSA measures for children aged 3 years or older. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were reviewed. Studies included between 18 and 676 participants ranging in age from 3;0 to 13;6 (years;months). Analyzed measures targeted multiple linguistic domains, and diagnostic accuracy ranged from less than 25% to greater than 90%. Morphosyntax measures achieved the highest accuracy, especially in combination with length measures, and at least one acceptable measure was identified for each 1-year age band up to 10 years old. CONCLUSION: Several LSA measures or combinations of measures are clinically useful for the identification of developmental language disorder, although more research is needed to replicate findings using rigorous methods and to explore measures that are informative for adolescents and across diverse varieties of English. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21183247.

From a Distance: Comparison of In-Person and Virtual Assessments With Adult-Child Dyads From Linguistically Diverse Backgrounds.

PURPOSE: Our proof-of-concept study tested the feasibility of virtual testing using child assessments that were originally validated for in-person testing only. METHOD: Ten adult-child dyads were assigned to complete both in-person and virtual tests of language, cognition, and narratives. Child participants fell between the ages of 4 and 8 years; adult participants were speech-language clinicians or researchers with experience in administering child assessments. Half of child participants were Spanish-English bilinguals, and half were monolingual English speakers. RESULTS: Results showed similar performance across in-person and virtual modalities on all assessments. Recommendations for adapting, administering, and scoring virtual measures with linguistically diverse children are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Although additional research on virtual assessment is needed, our results open opportunities for appropriate remote assessment, particularly for bilingual children, who may not have in-person access to speech-language pathology services.