Search

Background: As delays or disorders in early language and communication are the most prevalent symptom in children with disabilities, early screening is crucial to promote prevention, early diagnosis, and intervention. However, to the best of our knowledge, no screening tool is available for the joint assessment of early language and social communication skills in European Portuguese (EP)‐learning children, which is critical for screening, monitoring and enrolment in appropriate early intervention services. Aims: (1) To adapt and validate the EP version of the Communication and Symbolic Behaviour Scales Developmental Profile™ (CSBS DP™) Infant–Toddler Checklist, a parental report for the screening of early language and social communication skills. (2) To conduct a cross‐cultural comparison between the EP adaptation and the original US version. Methods & Procedures: A total of 611 EP‐learning children (ages 6–24 months) were assessed on the CSBS DP Infant–Toddler Checklist. Normative data, psychometric characteristics (i.e., internal consistency and test–retest reliability), and cross‐cultural comparison between the EP and the original version were explored. Outcomes & Results: Internal consistency ranged from good to excellent and the test–retest reliability was excellent. The performance of the EP and US samples matched on almost all scores. However, EP children performed significantly better than their American peers in the Social compositive at 22 months and in the Symbolic composite at 20 months. No further differences were found. Conclusions & Implications: These findings showed that the EP CSBS DP Infant–Toddler Checklist seems to be a reliable screening tool of communicative and symbolic behaviours for EP‐learning children, which can be particularly relevant for decision‐making in clinical practice. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Early communication skills are known to be related to later language outcomes. Thus, screening tools for the early identification of children at risk for language and communication impairments, which may lead to monitoring and early intervention, have the potential to promote better outcomes. However, to the best of our knowledge, no screening tool is available for the assessment of early communication abilities in EP‐learning children. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study adapted and validated the EP CSBS DP Infant–Toddler Checklist, the first published parental report checklist for the assessment of early communication skills in EP. It described the psychometric characteristics of the adapted checklist, summarized the newly available normative data for EP‐learning infants and toddlers, and compared the performance of EP‐learning children with the original standardization sample reported for American English. The results demonstrated that this tool is a reliable instrument for the early screening of language, communicative and symbolic behaviours for EP‐learning children between 6 and 24 months of age. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Given that early screening is crucial to promote prevention, early diagnosis and intervention, the availability of this tool is particularly relevant for children monitoring and their enrolment in appropriate early intervention services, helping decision‐making in clinical practice, in line with current guidelines regarding early monitoring and intervention to promote and support better outcomes. Thus, the tool and related normative data will be useful for paediatricians, family doctors, primary healthcare providers, developmental psychologists and speech–language therapists, among other professionals in the healthcare and educational fields, concerned with speech, language, and communication development and impairments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is extremely limited population‐based research on social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SCD). Population‐based samples have the potential to better characterize the SCD phenotype by mitigating confounds and biases that are typical of convenience and clinical samples. Aims: The aims of this preliminary epidemiologic study were to advance our understanding of the SCD phenotype relative to developmental language disorder (DLD), obtain an estimate of prevalence, identify risk factors and lay the groundwork for future population level research of SCD. Methods & Procedures: We analysed existing data from the EpiSLI Database to examine social communication skills in 393 8th grade (13–14 years) children with and without a history of DLD. The primary measure used to evaluate SCD was the Children's Communication Checklist (CCC‐2). Two case definitions of SCD reflecting DSM‐5 criteria were examined. Both definitions involved significant pragmatic impairment, employing a commonly adopted clinical cut‐point of 1.5 SD. In one case, pragmatic deficits could occur along with structural language deficits and, in the other case (established using principal component analysis), pragmatic and social skills were disproportionately lower than structural language abilities. Outcomes & Results: When using the first case definition, SCD was much more common in children with a history of DLD than without DLD and history of language disorder at kindergarten was a significant risk factor for SCD in adolescence. However, it is important to note that SCD could be found in children with no prior deficits in other aspects of language. When the second definition was employed, SCD was equally distributed across children with and without a history of DLD. Male sex was a significant risk factor using this case definition of SCD. The estimated prevalence of SCD ranged from 7% (SE = 1.5%) to 11% (SE = 1.7%), acknowledging that prevalence depends on the cut‐point selected to determine communication disorder. Conclusions & Implications: These findings contribute to our understanding of the association between SCD and DLD by recognizing varying profiles of pragmatic and social communication difficulties, which in turn may help refine our diagnostic categories. Preliminary prevalence estimates of SCD can serve as an initial guidepost for identification and planning for intervention services for this condition. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: There is considerable debate about the diagnostic category of SCD and its relation to other neurodevelopmental disorders. What this study adds to existing knowledge: Using data from a US‐based epidemiologic sample of DLD, this study offers new information about the association between SCD and DLD, provides preliminary estimates of SCD prevalence, and identifies risk factors for SCD. Clinical implications of this study: Improved understanding of possible profiles of pragmatic and social communication deficits will help to clarify diagnostic categories and preliminary prevalence estimates may assist with ensuring availability of adequate intervention services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]