Predictive factors of reading in children with developmental language disorder.

The current study aimed to fill the gap in research on factors predictive of word reading in French-speaking children with developmental language disorder (DLD) by finding out whether the same predictors of written word recognition evidenced in typically developing children would be retrieved in children with DLD or if some predictors could be specific to children with DLD, especially in the phonological domain. In total, 38 children with DLD and 44 control children were followed from 6 to 8 years in a longitudinal design including two time points: (1) just before explicit reading instruction, where potential predictors of reading were assessed (oral language skills and reading-related skills), and (2) after 2 years of learning to read, where isolated word reading and text reading were assessed in addition to the assessment of oral language skills and reading-related skills. The study mainly showed that the predictors of reading identified in typically developing children are retrieved in children with DLD except for phonemic awareness; the latter result was probably explained by a floor effect. Among the predictors in the phonological domain, phonological instability appeared as a promising predictor of reading irregular words. These results are consistent with the findings of many previous studies and tend to confirm the idea of a strong link between oral phonological skills and written word recognition skills; they also call for attention to specific features in the phonological development of children with DLD when learning to read, particularly phonological instability as a direction for future exploration.

Speed of processing in Developmental Language Disorder (DLD): The case of real-time grammatical processing.

BACKGROUND: Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) impacts various aspects of children's language abilities, including the processing of inflectional morphology. Prior research suggests that children with DLD exhibit deficits in processing speed and sensitivity to grammatical inflections, yet the relationship between these deficits remains unclear. AIMS: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between processing speed and sensitivity to inflectional morphology in children with DLD, focusing on their real-time processing abilities in response to regular past tense, third person singular, and regular plural inflections at different rates of sentence articulation. METHOD: Eighteen children with DLD and 18 age-matched controls underwent word monitoring tasks that assessed sensitivity to grammaticality of inflections in sentences presented at normal and slow rates of articulation. RESULTS: At a normal rate of articulation, children with DLD demonstrated slower response times and reduced sensitivity to grammaticality across all inflections compared to controls. When the articulation rate was slowed, children with DLD showed improved sensitivity, particularly to regular plural and third person singular inflections, although deficits in processing the regular past tense persisted. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest a significant relationship between processing speed and inflectional morphology sensitivity in children with DLD. Slower articulation rates improved grammatical sensitivity for certain inflections, highlighting the potential of tailored interventions that consider processing speed limitations. Persistent difficulties with the regular past tense inflection indicate the need for targeted support for children with DLD in this area. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) have a wide range of language difficulties, but deficits in inflectional morphology are regarded as a 'hallmark' of the disorder. Children with DLD are also very likely to show deficits in speed of processing, although it is not known if a 'slowness to process' can causally explain the language difficulties these children experience. What this study adds to existing knowledge When grammatical sensitivity was measured using an online real-time task, children with DLD showed widespread inflectional deficits when sentences were spoken at a normal conversational rate. When sentence articulation rate was slowed down, children with DLD were faster, more accurate and more sensitive to the grammaticality of constructions. However, deficits in the regular past tense remained persistent, even in this slow-rate condition. What are the clinical implications of this work? This study has implications for clinical and educational practices that work with children with DLD to improve their language skills. The findings of this study show that when children with DLD are given more time to process incoming information, their grammatical skills significantly improve. This study also shows that deficits in the regular past tense are persistent, and children are likely need extensive and intensive support with this particular grammatical feature.

Exploring concepts of friendship formation in children with language disorder using a qualitative framework analysis.

PURPOSE: Sociometric studies and adult reports have established that children with Language Disorder (LD) are at risk of peer relationship difficulties. However, we have limited knowledge of how children with LD understand friendship, whom they deem as a good or bad friend, and what role their friendship concepts play in their relationships with peers. This exploratory study aimed to conduct a qualitative investigation into the friendship concepts that children with LD hold and to explore their strategies for making friends. METHODS: We conducted multiple, art-informed interviews on the topic of friendship with 14 children with LD at the age of 6-8 years. Participating children were based in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. They attended enhanced provision, specific speech and language classes and mainstream classrooms. We used framework analysis to map children's responses to Selman's (1979) developmental model of interpersonal understanding, which espouses a theory of children's social development within the context of peer relationships. RESULTS: The understanding of friendship formation in children with LD varied from physical presence to mutual support and sharing. Children's ideas about a good/bad friend represented the lowest developmental stage. Participants from the mainstream classroom demonstrated the highest stages of interpersonal understanding. Children with LD did not mention their language abilities as a barrier to making friends. CONCLUSION: There are limited studies exploring friendship directly from children with LD, and this study provides insights into this gap, by utilising art-informed interviews. Children's immature understanding of a good/bad friend points towards a potential susceptibility to false friends, which we suggest needs further empirical validation. We also found that children with LD did not pay attention to their language difficulties when making friends, which raises questions about the ways diagnoses are shared with children. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Children with Language Disorder (LD) are at risk of peer relationship difficulties. Studies to date are based on sociometrics and adult reports. Only a few studies employ participatory approaches to research with children, directly engaging children with LD when exploring their friendships What this paper adds This paper directly asks children with LD about their understanding of friendship and strategies for making friends. Physical proximity and play are important to children.s understanding of friendship especially in recognising good and bad friends. This indicates potential reasons for children with LD being susceptible to false friends Additionally, children with LD do not perceive language and communication as a barrier to making friends. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Concepts around friendship and good/bad friends should be routinely assessed and targeted (if appropriate) in interventions. The study highlights the need to continue discussing practices around sharing diagnoses with children with LD.

Collaborative working in speech and language therapy for children with DLD-What are parents' needs?

BACKGROUND: Collaborative practice between therapists and parents is a key element of family-centred care and is essential if we want to address family priorities and needs in interventions. However, collaborative practice is challenging for speech and language therapists (SLTs) and parents. To facilitate collaboration, collaborative practices need to be implemented into speech and language therapy for young children with developmental language disorders (DLD) and their families. Actual change and implementation of collaboration in practice will be successful only when it corresponds with patients' needs, in our case the needs of parents of young children with DLD. AIMS: To explore parents' needs in their collaboration with SLTs during therapy for their young child with DLD. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Parents of children with (a risk of) DLD in the age of 2-6 years were eligible for participation. We recruited parents via SLTs. Twelve parents of children with DLD participated in semi-structured interviews about their needs in collaboration with SLTs. We used a phenomenological approach focusing on parents' lived experiences. We transcribed the interviews verbatim. All interviews were read/listened to and discussed by our parent panel, multiple researchers and the interviewer. Two researchers independently analysed the data using the reflective thematic analysis of Braun and Clarke. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The analysis of the interviews resulted in six themes: (1) knowing what to expect, (2) knowing how to contribute, (3) feeling capable of supporting the child, (4) trusting the therapist, (5) alignment with parents and children's needs, preferences and priorities and (6) time and space for asking questions and sharing information. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Parents want SLTs to invest time in collaborating with them. Parents need SLTs to empower them to become a collaborative partner and enable them to support their child in daily life. Parents need knowledge about the therapy process and diagnosis and skills in how to support their child's language development. Also, they need emotional support to feel secure enough to support their child, to ask questions to therapists and to bring up their own thoughts and opinions in therapy. Parents' needs are in line with collaborative working as described in literature, which underlines the importance of implementing collaborative working in speech and language therapy for young children with DLD. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Several reviews have explored parents' perspectives on speech and language therapy. Results reveal parents' experiences with speech and language therapy in general, and parents' perspectives on specific topics such as shared decision-making and parents/therapists roles in therapy. What this study adds This study adds insights into parents' needs to ensure collaboration with speech and language therapists (SLTs). Parents of young children with developmental language disorders (DLD) need SLTs to invest time to create optimal collaboration. It is important for parents to have enough knowledge about DLD and the SLT process, skills and confidence in how to support their child and opportunities to share thoughts and questions with SLTs. Our results underline the importance of parents being empowered by SLTs to become a collaborative partner. What are the clinical implications of this work? When children are referred to speech and language therapy, parents often venture into an unknown journey. They need support from SLTs to become a collaborative partner in speech and language therapy. Parents need SLTs to invest time in sharing knowledge, skills and power and align therapy to parents' and child's needs, preferences, priorities and expectations.

Maternal input to 24-month-old children with sex chromosome trisomies.

BACKGROUND: Maternal input plays an important role in influencing linguistic development during the first years of life, and it is evident that mothers adapt their language according to their child's characteristics. Recently, it was demonstrated that maternal input addressed to children with sex chromosome trisomies (SCTs) at 8 months of age is prosodically and functionally different from that addressed to typically developing (TD) peers. AIMS: The study aimed at analysing maternal input at 24 months when the presence of a language delay could be more evident than during the preverbal stage. We were interested in examining if maternal input was influenced by a diagnosis of SCT (by comparing children with SCT and TD children) or by children's linguistic level (by comparing children with weak lexical ability versus children with typical lexical ability regardless of the presence of genetic diagnosis). METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Forty-four mother-child dyads in which the children had an SCT and 20 mother-child dyads in which the children were TD participated in the study. Of these 64 dyads, 23 children (21 with SCTs and two TD children) formed the group of children with weak lexical ability (children with a vocabulary size lower than 50 words at 24 months). Maternal utterances were collected during one video-recorded play session and were then coded considering both the linguistic and functional features of the input. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: The results showed that the input addressed to 24-month-old children with SCTs is as rich and complex as that addressed to TD peers. Moreover, no significant differences in the functions expressed by maternal input were found (all ps > 0.05). Comparing the children with weak lexical ability and the children with typical lexical ability in our sample, having a poor vocabulary at 24 months of age showed a significant influence on the maternal input features: the input addressed to children with weak lexical ability was characterised by a higher presence of attention getters (U = 217.00, p = 0.007) and a lower proportion of questions (U = 236.00, p = 0.017) than that of mothers of typically-talking children. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: At 24 months of age, it seems that the presence of a language delay and not belonging to the clinical group of children with SCTs influences the functional characteristics of the maternal input. It is important to support the parents of children with SCTs during the communication process and later during their child's development, leading them to observe their children's manifested skills rather than looking for possible predicted difficulties. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Studies in the literature demonstrated how mothers can generally adapt their input to their child's characteristics. To our knowledge, only two recent studies analysed the maternal input addressed to children with SCT at 8 months of age, highlighting significant differences. What this paper adds to existing knowledge The maternal input addressed to children with SCT at 24 months of age is not different from that addressed to TD children. At 24 months of age, the mothers adapt their input to the verbal competence shown by their child (weak lexical ability versus typically-talking), while belonging to the clinical group does not show an influence. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? All the participants of the present study received prenatal diagnosis disclosure by an expert team of professionals, and they were all involved in a longitudinal study aimed at monitoring the children's development and supporting their parents. These results show that giving clear and complete information about possible development paths to parents of children with SCTs during diagnosis disclosure is crucial. Moreover, supporting the parents during the communication process and later during their child's development is fundamental, leading them to observe their children's manifested skills rather than looking for possible predicted difficulties.

Enhancing social-emotional functioning in adolescents with developmental language disorder or deaf or hard of hearing through a Theory of Mind intervention.

BACKGROUND: This study examines the effect of a Theory of Mind (ToM) intervention on ToM abilities and social-emotional functioning in adolescents with developmental language disorder (DLD) or who are deaf/hard of hearing (D/HH). It emphasizes the importance of self-reflection and measurement for personal growth. The research design incorporates both subjective and objective measures to evaluate the intervention's efficacy. AIMS: To investigate the impact of the ToM intervention on ToM abilities and social-emotional functioning in adolescents with DLD or who are D/HH. It hypothesizes that participants in the intervention groups will show improved ToM and social-emotional functioning compared with those in the control groups. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Adolescents with DLD or who are D/HH were recruited through collaboration with educational institutions. The study utilized a pre-/post-test design, assigning participants to either the intervention or the control group. The ToM intervention involved targeted activities to enhance ToM abilities. ToM abilities and social-emotional functioning were assessed using standardized tests and self-report questionnaires. Statistical analyses compared outcomes between the intervention and no intervention groups. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The findings reveal subjective improvements in social-emotional functioning among the D/HH intervention group. However, no significant effects on objective ToM measures were observed. These results highlight the need for further investigation and refinement of interventions in these areas. Future research should focus on improving intervention strategies and exploring additional objective measures to gain a comprehensive understanding of the intervention's impact on ToM and social-emotional functioning in this population. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The ToM intervention shows subjective benefits in improving social-emotional functioning among D/HH adolescents. However, it does not yield significant effects on objective ToM measures. These findings emphasize the ongoing need to refine interventions targeting ToM abilities and social-emotional functioning in this population. Future studies should explore alternative strategies and incorporate additional objective measures to enhance understanding and outcomes. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Before this study, it was known that ToM interventions have the potential to enhance ToM abilities. However, the specific effects of such interventions on subjective and objective measures for ToM and social-emotional functioning in adolescents with DLD or who are D/HH remained unclear, necessitating further research. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge This study adds to the existing knowledge by demonstrating subjective improvements in social-emotional functioning among adolescents who are D/HH and underwent a ToM intervention. However, no significant effects on objective ToM measures were observed. These findings highlight the need for refining interventions and exploring additional measures to better understand the intervention's impact. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The subjective improvements in social-emotional functioning observed in this study have important clinical implications. They suggest that ToM interventions can positively impact the social well-being of adolescents who are D/HH. However, the lack of significant effects on objective ToM measures emphasizes the need for further research and intervention refinement to address specific areas of improvement in this population.

Developmental language disorder and neurodiversity: Surfacing contradictions, tensions and unanswered questions.

BACKGROUND: Neurodiversity is increasingly discussed in relation to autism research and practice. However, there is a lack of scholarship concerning the neurodevelopmental condition of Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) and the neurodiversity movement. While this movement may hold opportunities for the DLD community, the application of the concept of neurodiversity to DLD research and practice needs consideration, as DLD and autism have very different levels of public and professional awareness and understanding. AIMS: In this article, we discuss what the concept of neurodiversity and the associated neurodiversity movement could mean for DLD research and practice. We aim to critique some assumptions that may arise from the application of neurodiversity principles (or assumed principles) to the field of DLD. METHODS: This is a discussion paper, drawing on the personal experiences and reflections of the author team. MAIN CONTRIBUTIONS: We make the case for why DLD should be included in discussions about neurodivergence and outline considerations for doing so, and why some issues and applications may be particular to DLD. We outline points of similarity and contrast with autism in relation to our understanding of neurodiversity. We consider the issues around diagnosis and terminology and urge practitioners to continue to diagnose DLD using currently agreed terminology, so as not to undermine recent awareness efforts. We note that a neurodiversity-informed perspective challenges us to offer interventions that operate at the level of our environments, not just at the level of an individual. Indeed, neurodiversity offers a platform to argue for better rights and more inclusive spaces in mental health settings, education and work for children and adults with DLD. CONCLUSIONS: DLD should be considered from a neurodiversity-informed perspective, and it is our hope that this will lead to neurodiversity-affirming practice that will afford young people with DLD better understanding from members of the public and the professionals who work with them. Further work is needed to better support children, young people and adults with DLD to have a voice in the neurodiversity movement. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Neurodiversity approaches are increasingly being taken up in research and practice in relation to autism, meaning that our understanding of autism and how autistic people are supported is increasingly drawing on the principles of neurodiversity. However, autism is not the only neurodivergent population. Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) is another neurodevelopmental condition; however, relative to autism, DLD has lower awareness amongst professionals and the public. There has been no scholarship that has examined DLD through the lens of neurodiversity, or considered the application of neurodiversity-affirming approaches to DLD. What this paper adds to existing knowledge In this paper, we examine what the neurodiversity movement means for DLD research and practice. In particular, we consider what neurodiversity in the field of autism might teach us about the application of neurodiversity in the field of DLD, and highlight where we believe there are important differences between the two populations. We reflect on what neurodiversity means for intervention, diagnosis, terminology and championing the need for accessibility, especially with regard to mental health support, education and employment. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Neurodiversity highlights the need to consider interventions at the level of an individual's environment (e.g., how can we make this space more inclusive?) as well as interventions operating at the level of the individual themselves (e.g., interventions focusing on an individual's language skills). We challenge the notion that neurodiversity-affirming approaches mean not diagnosing DLD or changing DLD's terminology: we argue that this is not in the spirit of the original neurodiversity movement, but also that for a condition with such low public awareness, these actions could do more harm than good for families affected by DLD. We call for more in-depth scholarship and discussion around the application of neurodiversity approaches to DLD and argue that the neurodiversity movement offers an important opportunity to raise better awareness and understanding of DLD in multiple sectors, including (but not limited to) mental health, education and employment.

A randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of parent-based models of language intervention for 2- to 3-year-old children with speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) in areas of social disadvantage.

BACKGROUND: Early language delay is exacerbated by social disadvantage. Factors such as parents' low levels of literacy, confidence and self-perception can affect the capacity to act on advice received, critical to empowerment. Methods used to achieve successful health outcomes in socially disadvantaged clinical populations may need enhancing. AIMS: To compare the impact of standard parent-based intervention (PBI) to enhanced PBI for young children with speech, language and communication needs (SCLN) and their families living in more socially disadvantaged populations. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: A multicentre clustered blind randomised controlled trial was used to compare the effect of parent-based group interventions to improve early language development with children (mean age 27.5 months) from more socially disadvantaged populations with an expressive vocabulary of 40 or less single words. Intervention sessions were delivered by a speech and language therapist, over a 20-week period. Participants received one of two interventions: (1) Standard Care - indirect group PBI - (PBI) (2) Enhanced Care: indirect group enhanced PBI - (EPBI). Both standardised and non-standardised measures were used as outcomes. Parent engagement in the intervention was captured through analysis of attendance and the Parent Activation Measure - Speech & Language Therapy (PAM-SLT) (Insignia Health, 2014). The PAM measures a person's knowledge, skills and confidence to manage their own health and well-being (NHS England, 2018). In this study, activation referred to parents' knowledge, skills and confidence to manage their child's language development. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five participants were randomised at baseline. Children in both groups made significant improvements in the outcome on MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories Sentence Length, from pre-intervention to post-intervention and 6 months post-intervention (p < 0.05). Changes in vocabulary and expressive language skills were more equivocal, showing wide variation in confidence intervals for both groups. Where parents attended at least one intervention session almost all effect sizes were in favour of the EPBI intervention. Parents' activation levels significantly increased for both groups (EPBI p < 0.001, PBI p = 0.003), with a moderate effect size in favour of EPBI (Hedges' G 0.37, confidence interval -0.02 to 0.76), although wide variation was found. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This trial provides some evidence of facilitating the language development of children with SLCN from more socially disadvantaged areas through supporting caregivers. However, we found variation in outcomes; some children made excellent progress, whilst others did not. Further exploration of parent engagement and its relationship to child language outcomes will be valuable to understanding more about mechanisms of change in interventions that involve parents. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) have a knock-on effect on emotional well-being, school readiness, literacy and school attainment, putting children at increased risk of long-term consequences such as poor literacy, mental health problems and unemployment. In disadvantaged areas, the prevalence of language difficulties is higher than elsewhere. Factors such as parents' low levels of literacy, confidence and self-perception can affect the capacity to act on advice received, critical to empowerment. What this paper adds to existing knowledge Children with SLCN from more socially disadvantaged areas can make improvements in their language development through parent intervention, although wide individual variation was found. There was some evidence that children achieve better outcomes with EPBI, which employed an interagency collaborative approach. Parent's engagement (activation levels) increased significantly over time with intervention, with the increase twice as big for EPBI. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This trial provides some evidence that it is possible to facilitate the language development of children from more socially disadvantaged areas through supporting their caregivers. Further research would be useful to determine whether increases in parent engagement are related to adherence to intervention and change in child outcomes.

[Oral language development in maltreated and foster children]. / Le développement du langage oral chez les enfants maltraités et placés.

Language disorders, which are still very poorly detected, are often present in abused children. While the consequences are well known and long-lasting, little is known about the development and specific characteristics of these children, depending on where they were placed, the type of abuse they suffered and the age at which they were placed. This finding led to a review of the literature aimed at better defining the state of knowledge on the subject, for the benefit of better detection and treatment.

Sex differences in early language delay and in developmental language disorder.

Developmental language disorder (DLD) is a neurodevelopmental condition, occurring in about 3% to 7% of preschoolers, that can impair communication and negatively impact educational and social attainments, in spite of adequate neurological, cognitive, emotional, social development, and educational opportunities for language learning. Significant risk factors for DLD are male sex, familial history of early language delay, low parental education, and various perinatal factors. A strong sex effect with a higher prevalence of language delay and DLD in males than in females has been consistently reported. Neurobiological and environmental risk factors, interacting with each other, are probably responsible for the phenotypic expression of DLD. The aim of this brief review is to further the knowledge of the role of sex in early language delay and DLD by analyzing the evidence from four significant sources: epidemiological studies, studies on twins, family aggregation studies, and studies on sex chromosome trisomies. Data pertaining only to sex differences (biological and physiological characteristics of females and males) will be analyzed. Studies on family aggregations and twins confirm the role of genetic factors and of sex in determining language abilities and disabilities, but genes alone do not determine outcomes. Sex chromosome trisomies represent a unique example of the relationship between a genetic alteration and a language disorder. Clarification of how sex acts in determining DLD could provide new information on early risk factors and, thus, contribute to improve diagnosis and clinical management.

The importance and challenges of improving early identification of language abilities: a commentary on Gasparini et al. (2023).

Finding early predictors of later language skills and difficulties is fraught with challenges because of the wide developmental variation in language. Gasparini et al. (Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2023) aimed to address this issue by applying machine learning methods to parent reports taken from a large longitudinal database (Early Language in Victoria Study). Using this approach, they identify two short, straightforward item sets, taken at 24 and 36 months, that can adequately predict language difficulties when children are 11 years of age. Their work represents an exciting step towards earlier recognition and support for children with Developmental Language Disorder. This commentary highlights the advantages and challenges of identifying early predictors of language in this way, and discusses future directions that can build on this important contribution.

Cognitive processes associated with working memory in children with developmental language disorder.

The current study examined how individual differences in language, nonverbal, and attention abilities relate to working memory in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) relative to age-matched typically developing (TD) peers using an interference-based model of working memory as our theoretical framework. Our experimental paradigm involved varying the domain (verbal/nonverbal) of recall items and an interference processing task, testing effects of interference. We examined the relative importance of language, nonverbal, and attention skills in predicting working memory performance by using Bayesian leave-one-out cross-validation to compare models with varied combinations of these skills as predictors. We then statistically tested selected models. Selected models were similar between groups for nonverbal, but not verbal, working memory. Language, nonverbal, and attention skills were associated with performance regardless of whether the working memory task was verbal or nonverbal for the DLD group, yet only attention was associated with verbal working memory for the TD group. A broader set of cognitive processes was involved in verbal recall in children with DLD than in TD peers, potentially reflecting diminished specialization of cognitive processes underlying language. The interference-based model of working memory accounted for interrelationships among language, processing speed, and inhibition of interference, revealing new insights into verbal processing.

Supporting adjective learning by children with Developmental Language Disorder: Enhancing metalinguistic approaches.

BACKGROUND: Adjectives are essential for communication, conceptual development and academic success. However, they are semantically and syntactically complex and can be particularly challenging for children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD). Surprisingly, language interventions have not typically focused on this important word class. AIMS: (1) To provide a supportive and accessible primer on adjectives for practitioners; (2) to explore how the SHAPE CODINGTM system can be adapted to support adjective learning in DLD; and (3) to provide practical recommendations on how to support adjective learning in clinical practice and education. METHODS/PROCEDURE: We synthesise linguistic and psychological research on adjective semantics, clinical insights into DLD and pedagogical practice supporting this population. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: We address the lack of specific training in the nature and acquisition of adjectives for speech and language therapists (SLTs) by providing an accessible primer. We also provide an innovative guide detailing how an established metalinguistic intervention might be adapted to support adjective learning. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Without targeted support for adjective learning, the communicative potential of children with DLD is compromised. Our recommendations can be used across a range of therapeutic and educational contexts to guide SLTs and teaching staff in developing practice in this area. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Adjectives are an essential word class needed for effective communication. They are also vital to successfully achieve academic objectives across all curriculum areas. For example, most subjects require children to be able to describe, evaluate, compare and discriminate different events, objects or techniques. Children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) have deficits in various domains of language that can affect adjective learning and use. What this paper adds to existing knowledge Despite the importance of adjectives, speech and language therapists (SLTs) and other professionals supporting language development rarely receive specific training regarding their structure and meanings, and how to teach and support their use. This article provides an accessible primer on the many subtypes of adjectives and how these behave syntactically and semantically. It explores how adjective teaching could be enhanced for children with DLD by adapting an established metalinguistic technique and provides practical recommendations for implementing this approach. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? By raising awareness of the complexities of adjectives and providing strategies to support their acquisition by children with DLD, this article will enable SLTs and teaching staff to improve their understanding and practice in this area and, with further research, to develop robust, effective interventions for children with DLD. This will contribute to enhancing the long-term academic, social and employment success of children with DLD.

Language intervention in bilingual children with developmental language disorder: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Although there is a growing body of literature on cognitive and language processing in bilingual children with developmental language disorder (DLD), there is a major gap in the evidence for language intervention. Critically, speech-language therapists are often required to make clinical decisions for language intervention on specific domains, such as phonology, vocabulary, morphosyntax and literacy. AIMS: To examine evidence for language intervention and cross-language transfer effects in bilingual children with DLD. Specifically, the study aimed to review intervention evidence targeting non-linguistic cognitive skills and six areas of language: phonology, vocabulary, morphosyntax, pragmatics, narrative skills and literacy. METHODS & PROCEDURES: We carried out searches in five electronic databases: CINAHL, Scopus, Psychinfo, Proquest and Sciencedirect. Data from selected papers were extracted and organized into the three following categories: study information, participant information and intervention information. Critical appraisal for selected papers was conducted using a quality assessment tool (QAT). OUTCOMES & RESULTS: We included 14 papers in the review. The majority indicated evidence for vocabulary intervention. There was limited evidence for intervention targeting phonology or morphosyntax. Cross-language generalization effects were evident for vocabulary, but in some instances also reported for morphosyntax and literacy. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The present review indicates that there is a significant gap in the literature regarding language intervention for several key language areas such as morphosyntax, narrative skills and literacy. There are only limited data for the effects of cross-language generalization indicating that more research is needed in this area specifically for skills beyond vocabulary. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Previous studies have examined the effects of bi- and monolingual intervention in bilingual children with DLD. Although the results indicated superior effects for bilingual compared with monolingual intervention, language intervention evidence in specific language domains (e.g., vocabulary, literacy) has not been investigated. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study will add intervention evidence specific to language domains such as phonology, vocabulary, morphosyntax, pragmatics, narrative skills and literacy. Additionally, we have synthesized intervention evidence on non-linguistic cognition given that these skills are often impaired in bilingual children with DLD. The review has also demonstrated evidence for the effects of cross-language transfer beyond vocabulary skills, especially when the intervention was provided in the home language. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Although there was a lack of intervention evidence in language domains such as pragmatics, the results indicated some evidence for intervention targeting vocabulary. However, positive effects of cross-language generalization were not constrained to vocabulary but were also reported for intervention targeting mean length of utterance and literacy in the home language. This result indicates an interactive nature of the two languages, as well as provides further evidence for supporting home language(s) in intervention. Finally, intervention targeting non-linguistic cognition may yield additional cross-domain generalization to language skills specifically for bilingual children with DLD.

The association of cognitive abilities with language disorder in 8-year-old children: A population-based clinical sample.

BACKGROUND: Despite accumulated evidence that language development depends on basic cognitive processes, the balance in contributions of verbal and non-verbal cognitive skills to language abilities is still underexplored. Little is known about which cognitive measures best predict the degree of severity in children with language disorder (LD). AIMS: To examine the association between verbal and non-verbal cognitive abilities with language abilities in typically developing and language impaired 8-year-old children, as well as which cognitive abilities are most effective in distinguishing LD severity levels. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Children (N = 509) from the Language-8 Study, which oversampled probable cases of children with LD from a population-based cohort in Norway, were assessed at 8 years. Language skills were assessed using the Norwegian Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-4 (CELF-4). Children's verbal and non-verbal cognitive abilities were assessed via standardized cognitive measures. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was first conducted to uncover the underlying factor structure of the cognitive variables. Using a hierarchical multiple regression analysis, we then examined to what extent the non-verbal cognition factor explained language abilities above and beyond verbal cognition factors. Lastly, multinomial logistic regression was used to examine which cognitive measures best predicted the degree of severity in the children with LD. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The EFA resulted in three factors (Verbal Cognition, Processing Speed and Memory, and Non-Verbal Cognition). The hierarchical multiple regression analysis revealed that all three cognitive factors contributed significantly to individual variation in language abilities. Non-Verbal Cognition explained 5.4% variance in language abilities above and beyond that accounted for by Verbal Cognition and Processing Speed and Memory. Results from the multinomial logistic regression analysis indicated that cognitive subtests, including Familiar Sequences, WASI Vocabulary and WASI Similarities, not only distinguished LD from typically developing children, but were also efficient in distinguishing severity of LD symptoms. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: This study confirms concurrent links between language and non-verbal cognitive skills above and beyond the contribution of verbal cognitive skills. The results provide further evidence that children with LD experience both language and cognitive problems in mid-childhood. Our findings suggest implications for LD intervention and diagnosis. The findings support the importance of measuring both verbal and non-verbal cognitive skills when making an LD diagnosis, and point to the potential of targeting underlying cognitive skills as one strategy to support language abilities. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Language development is dependent on basic cognitive processes. These include both verbal and non-verbal cognitive abilities. Children with LD often experience both language and cognitive problems. There is evidence that performance on cognitive tests may be associated with the degree of severity of LD. What this paper adds to existing knowledge The current results from a large population-based cohort establish that a number of verbal and non-verbal cognitive abilities are tightly linked to variation in language abilities and the degree of severity of LD. Our study confirms concurrent links between language and non-verbal cognitive abilities above and beyond the contribution of verbal cognitive abilities. We also identify specific verbal and non-verbal cognitive tests that distinguish between typical children and children with LD, as well as LD severity. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Our findings support the importance of measuring both verbal and non-verbal cognitive skills when making an LD diagnosis. Our findings also point to the potential of targeting underlying cognitive skills as one strategy to support language abilities. We suggest that future intervention studies focus on the impact of non-verbal cognitive skills on language development in children with LD.

Stability of language difficulties among a clinical sample of preschoolers.

BACKGROUND: Some data call into question the persistence of developmental language disorders (DLDs) identified during the preschool period. For this reason, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) often reassess children. However, it is unclear if the instability of the profiles documented in community sample studies is present in children referred to specialized clinics. Given the scarcity of SLP resources, is re-evaluating the language skills of these children a good use of clinical time? AIM: To examine the stability of the findings from two SLP assessments in a sample of Canadian preschool children referred to a tertiary clinic between the ages of 2 and 6 years. It was hypothesized that children under the age of 4 years at first assessment and children with less severe initial deficits would show less stability of DLD diagnosis. METHODS & PROCEDURES: The clinical files of children referred to an early childhood psychiatric clinic in Canada were reviewed. For 149 children with two SLPs assessment reports, persistence of language deficits was documented and tested with McNemar's statistics. Differences between preschoolers under the age of 4 versus 4 years and over, as well as between mildly and severely impaired children, were examined. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: High level of agreement (94%) and McNemar's test (p = 0.180) supported the stability of initial diagnosis. The stability for children assessed before the age of 4 (n = 64) was 100%, and was significantly different from older children's (n = 85) stability of 89% (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.01; bilateral). The stability for children with mild impairments (n = 18) was 78%, which was significantly lower than the stability (97%) in children with severe impairments (n = 114) (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.007; bilateral). CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: No instability of language status was observed in children assessed before 4 years of age, which could be related to the significant severity of the difficulties that children in this age group presented and be specific to this type of clinical sample. The great stability of language status observed in preschoolers referred to a specialized clinic suggests that clinicians should limit reassessments to devote available resources to intervention efforts. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject? Previous research that has demonstrated important instability in the classification of language impairment before 4 years of age gathered data mainly by screening the general population or was not based on a comprehensive clinical assessment. What this paper adds to existing knowledge? This study investigated the classification stability of DLD between two comprehensive SLP assessments in a clinical sample of Canadian preschoolers. The results indicate great stability of language status assessed before 4 years old in this population, suggesting that severity of impairments may trump the age factor in this group. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? In the case of children referred to a specialized clinic, clinicians and policymakers should be aware that DLD diagnosis made before 4 years of age remains stable during preschool age, and that a best practice with this population would be to abandon unnecessary testing in favour of early intervention.

A systematic scoping review on contextual factors associated with communicative participation among children with developmental language disorder.

BACKGROUND: Variations in communicative participation of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) cannot be wholly explained by their language difficulties alone and may be influenced by contextual factors. Contextual factors may support or hinder communicative participation in children, which makes their identification clinically relevant. AIMS: To investigate which contextual (environmental and personal) factors in early childhood are protective, risk or neutral factors for communicative participation among school-aged children with DLD, and to identify possible gaps in knowledge about this subject. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A scoping review was conducted based on a systematic search of studies published from January 2007 to March 2022 in Pubmed, Embase (without MEDLINE), CINAHL and PsycINFO. In total, 8802 studies were reviewed using predefined eligibility criteria, of which 32 studies were included for data extraction and critically appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (2021) tools. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: The methodological quality of included studies was adequate to strong. Personal protective factors identified are being a preschool girl, reaching school age and being prosocial, while personal risk factors are becoming a teenager or adolescent, having low socio-cognitive skills and experiencing comorbid mobility impairment or behavioural problems. Gender after the preschool years and non-verbal abilities were not found to be of influence, and the role of socio-emotional skills is inconclusive. Receiving therapy is an environmental protective factor, while the association between socio-economical family characteristics with communicative participation is inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Limited research has been conducted on which risk and protective factors present in early childhood are associated with later communicative participation of children with DLD. The influence of co-occurring health conditions, social background variables, individual psychological assets, interpersonal relationships and attitudes of other people represent knowledge gaps. In addition, knowledge about the comparative effectiveness of different types of interventions and service delivery models, and the impact of administrative control, organizational mechanisms and standards established by governments on children's communicative participation is lacking. More longitudinal research is needed focusing on the identification of relevant personal and environmental factors and the interactions between them in relation to communicative participation outcomes. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Children with DLD experience varying degrees of communicative participation restrictions. Insight into contextual factors that influence communicative participation can help to identify children at risk and inform family and child-centred therapy. Systematic research on contextual factors that facilitate or hinder communicative participation in children with DLD is currently lacking. What this paper adds to existing knowledge Knowledge of protective factors can guide the development of interventions for children and young people with DLD that boost resilience and facilitate communicative participation, while insight into the risk factors can help professionals identify the most vulnerable children and develop interventions that can lift or neutralize barriers present in the life of these children. Specific groups potentially at risk are young boys, children with co-morbid mobility impairment, children with conduct problems, and children reaching adolescence. In contrast, potentially protective factors are reaching school age and being prosocial. In addition, the development of socio-cognitive skills may be beneficial for the communicative participation of children with DLD. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? To support communicative participation, it is important that professionals who work with children with DLD understand which groups are at risk for communicative participation restrictions, and which factors can foster resilience. In the absence of evidence-based instruments for the systematic assessment of personal and environmental factors, consulting parents and children on the contextual factors that they perceive as important remains critical.

'It depends on who I'm with': How young people with developmental language disorder describe their experiences of language and communication in school.

BACKGROUND: The risks of developmental language disorder (DLD) for both educational progress and socio-emotional development are well documented, but little is known about how children and young people with DLD experience and describe their language and communication. The need to complement experimental and quantitative studies with qualitative perspectives of the lived experience of individuals with DLD for speech and language therapists (SLT) practice has recently been foregrounded. AIMS: To understand further the experiences of young people with DLD focusing on language and communication in a school context, and thereby contribute to the improvement of the communicative situation in school for this group. The study is guided by the following research question: How do young people diagnosed with DLD describe their experiences of language and communication in school? METHODS & PROCEDURES: The study is based on data generated from qualitative semi-structured interviews with 23 participants diagnosed with DLD (age 13-19 years old) living in Sweden. All participants attended mainstream schools. To enable data to be collected during COVID-19 restrictions, all interviews were conducted using Zoom. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Four main themes related to experiences of language and communication in school were constructed from the interviews: (1) feelings of inadequacy and comparisons with others; (2) feelings of being misjudged and misunderstood; (3) the importance of feeling safe and comfortable; and (4) the significance of the social and communicative context. The results bear witness of difficult and challenging aspects related to language and communication in school, including educational, social and emotional dimensions. An important outcome of this study is how young people diagnosed with DLD describe their language and communication functioning to be dependent on both individual characteristics and abilities, as well as situational, contextual and social factors. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The results from this study show that young people with DLD can have persisting problems related to language and communication in school, including educational, social and emotional dimensions. SLT services may therefore be needed throughout the school years to ensure that students with DLD receive adequate support. In addition, support that goes beyond language abilities and targets social, contextual and emotional aspects should be considered. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Children and young people have unique knowledge about their language and communication which is instrumental for designing interventions and support strategies. Qualitative analyses of interview data have been able to identify both risk factors and protective strategies in relation to the well-being of individuals with DLD. Despite this, children and young people with DLD are rarely heard in research or clinical discussions. What this paper adds to existing knowledge In this study we listen to the voices of young people with DLD as they describe their experiences of language and communication in school. The participants describe a condition that makes them struggle to keep up with peers and puts them at risk of being misjudged by teachers, but also give examples of situations where negative consequences are hardly felt. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? DLD is a complex and dynamic disorder where contextual and social factors interact with individual abilities in creating the end result. The results of the study indicate that DLD can cause persisting problems related to language and communication in school, with impact on educational, social and emotional dimensions. To counteract these effects, SLT services may be needed throughout the school years, and support that goes beyond language abilities must be considered.

Language gains in 4-6-year-old children with developmental language disorder and the relation with language profile, severity, multilingualism and non-verbal cognition.

BACKGROUND: Early and effective treatment for children with developmental language disorder (DLD) is important. Although a growing body of research shows the effects of interventions at the group level, clinicians observe large individual differences in language growth, and differences in outcomes across language domains. A systematic understanding of how child characteristics contribute to changes in language skills is still lacking. AIMS: To assess changes in the language domains: expressive morphosyntax; receptive and expressive vocabulary; and comprehension, in children in special needs education for DLD. To explore if differences in language gains between children are related to child characteristics: language profile; severity of the disorder; being raised mono- or multilingually; and cognitive ability. METHODS & PROCEDURES: We extracted data from school records of 154 children (4-6 years old) in special needs education offering a language and communication-stimulating educational environment, including speech and language therapy. Changes in language were measured by comparing the scores on standardized language tests at the beginning and the end of a school year. Next, we related language change to language profile (receptive-expressive versus expressive-only disorders), severity (initial scores), growing up mono- and multilingually, and children's reported non-verbal IQ scores. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Overall, the children showed significant improvements in expressive morphosyntax, expressive vocabulary and language comprehension. Baseline scores and gains were lowest for expressive morphosyntax. Differences in language gains between children with receptive-expressive disorders and expressive-only disorders were not significant. There was more improvement in children with lower initial scores. There were no differences between mono- and multilingual children, except for expressive vocabulary. There was no evidence of a relation between non-verbal IQ scores and language growth. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Children with DLD in special needs education showed gains in language performance during one school year. There was, however, little change in morphosyntactic scores, which supports previous studies concluding that poor morphosyntax is a persistent characteristic of DLD. Our results indicate that it is important to include all children with DLD in intervention: children with receptive-expressive and expressive disorders; mono- and multilingual children, and children with high, average and low non-verbal IQ scores. We did not find negative relations between these child factors and changes in language skills. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Intervention studies indicate that intervention can be effective, but not for all children with DLD, and not in all language domains. Longitudinal studies on language development show stable growth patterns in children with DLD at the group level. A systematic understanding of how child characteristics contribute to changes in language skills is still lacking. What this paper adds to existing knowledge In this study, we report on the language gains of a cohort of 154 children with DLD (4-6 years old), in a special education setting for children with language disorders. Our sample includes children with receptive-expressive disorders and expressive-only disorders, and monolingual as well as multilingual children. Our results show that children's language skills improved. The co-normed tests we used revealed that the children had much lower growth in morphosyntax than in the other language domains. Language gains between children with receptive-expressive and expressive-only language disorders did not differ, children with lower initial test scores showed more improvement than children with higher initial scores, multilingual children showed more gains in expressive vocabulary than monolingual children, and there was no effect of non-verbal IQ on change in language scores. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The results suggest that catching up on language is possible for children with DLD. It is important to include all children with DLD in intervention: mono- and multilingual children; children with receptive-expressive and expressive disorders; and children with high, average and low non-verbal IQ scores. We did not find negative relations between these child factors and changes in language skills. The limited growth in morphosyntax compared with other linguistic areas warrants the attention of both practitioners and researchers, with a particular focus on the implementation of research findings in clinical practice.

The effects of maternal smartphone use on mother-child interaction.

This study assessed the effects of maternal smartphone use on mother-child interaction. Thirty-three Israeli mothers and their 24- to 36-month-old toddlers (16 boys) from middle-high socioeconomic status participated in three within-subjects experimental conditions: maternal smartphone use, maternal magazine reading, and uninterrupted dyadic free-play. The mothers produced fewer utterances, provided fewer responses to child bids, missed child bids more often, and exchanged fewer conversational turns with their children when engaged with a smartphone or printed magazines compared to uninterrupted free-play. The quality of maternal responsiveness was also decreased. These findings suggest maternal smartphone use compromises mother-child interaction, which given smartphone ubiquity in daily life may have negative effects on child development in various domains, including language, cognition, and socioemotional regulation.