Premium
Modifying a language screening tool for three‐year‐old children identified severe language disorders six months earlier
Author(s) -
Nayeb Laleh,
Lagerberg Dagmar,
Westerlund Monica,
Sarkadi Anna,
Lucas Steven,
Eriksson Mårten
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
acta paediatrica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.772
H-Index - 115
eISSN - 1651-2227
pISSN - 0803-5253
DOI - 10.1111/apa.14790
Subject(s) - medicine , comprehension , word (group theory) , pediatrics , predictive value , language development , false positive paradox , audiology , task (project management) , developmental psychology , linguistics , psychology , artificial intelligence , philosophy , management , computer science , economics
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 the following: 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. Conclusion Changing the required word combinations from three to two words worked well. The three‐word test identified one extra confirmed case, but resulted in 10 more false positives. Lack of cooperation during screening constituted an increased risk for DLD .