Search

Purpose: This study aims to systematically identify items that measure comnicative participation from measurement instruments that measure (aspects communication and/or participation in children and adolescents (5–18 years with communication disorders, for developing an item bank. Method: A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE Embase to search for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) or pareports measuring aspects of communication and/or participation in childand adolescents. The individual items of the included measurement instrumwere reviewed on whether they measure communicative participation. The itwere then classified into one of the International Classification of FunctioDisability and Health (ICF) for Children and Youth (World Health Organiza2007) domains of activities and participation. Results: A total of 29 instruments were found, nine PROMs and 20 preports. One hundred forty-five items were identified that measure communtive participation. From these 145 items, 74 were retrieved from PROMs (5and 71 were retrieved from parent reports (49%). The majority of items classified in ICF Domain 7, interpersonal interactions and relationships (73.8followed by Domain 8, major life areas (13.8%), and Domain 9, commsocial, and civic life (8.3%). Only a few items were found in Domains 5 and none was found in Domains 1, 2, and 4. Conclusions: We identified 145 items potentially useful for developing an bank addressing communicative participation in children and adolescents communication disorders. However, item development in collaboration with target population is needed to ensure that these items fully reflect the const.

INTRODUCTION: Developmental language disorder (DLD) is a common childhood condition negatively influencing communication and psychosocial development. An increasing number of pathogenic variants or chromosomal anomalies possibly related to DLD have been identified. To provide a base for accurate clinical genetic diagnostic work-up for DLD patients, understanding the specific genetic background is crucial. This study aims to give a systematic literature overview of pathogenic variants or chromosomal anomalies causative for DLD in children.METHODS: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed and Embase on available literature related to the genetic background of diagnosed DLD in children. Included papers were critically appraised before data extraction. An additional search in OMIM was performed to see if the described DLD genes are associated with a broader clinical spectrum.RESULTS: The search resulted in 15,842 papers. After assessing eligibility, 47 studies remained, of which 25 studies related to sex chromosome aneuploidies and 15 papers concerned other chromosomal anomalies (SCAs) and/or Copy Number Variants (CNVs), including del15q13.1-13.3 and del16p11.2. The remaining 7 studies displayed a variety of gene variants. 45 (candidate) genes related to language development, including FOXP2, GRIN2A, ERC1, and ATP2C2. After an additional search in the OMIM database, 22 of these genes were associated with a genetic disorder with a broader clinical spectrum, including intellectual disability, epilepsy, and/or autism. CONCLUSION: Our study illustrates that DLD can be related to SCAs and specific CNV's. The reported (candidate) genes ( n = 45) in the latter category reflect the genetic heterogeneity and support DLD without any comorbidities and syndromic language disorder have an overlapping genetic etiology.

Purpose: This study explores limitations in communication in daily life of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) from their parents' perspective as well as communicative abilities and social functioning in the classroom from their teacher's perspective. Furthermore, differences between children with mixed receptive–expressive disorder and children with expressive-only disorder in communication in daily life and social functioning are studied. Method: Data were collected through questionnaires completed by parents and teachers of children (5–6 years old) who attended schools for special education for DLD. Language test scores were retrieved from school records. Parents of 60 children answered open-ended questions about situations and circumstances in which their child was most troubled by language difficulties. Teachers of 83 children rated communicative abilities, social competence, and student–teacher relationship. Results: Parents reported communication with strangers as most troublesome and mentioned the influence of the mental state of their child. Parents considered limitations in expressing oneself and being understood and not being intelligible as core difficulties. Teachers rated the children's communicative abilities in the school context as inadequate, but their scores concerning social competence and the quality of teacher–child relationships fell within the normal range. Children with receptive–expressive disorder experienced limitations in communication in almost all situations, whereas those with expressive disorder faced limitations in specific situations. Children with receptive–expressive disorder were also significantly more limited in their communicative abilities and social competence at school than children with expressive disorder. No differences were found between the two groups in the quality of the teacher–child relationship. Conclusions: The results confirm that children with DLD face significant challenges in a va

BACKGROUND: Collaboration between therapists and parents of children with developmental disabilities is a key element of family-centred care. In practice, collaboration appears to be challenging for both parents and therapists. This systematic review aims to make explicit how therapists can optimise their collaboration with parents of young children with developmental disabilities, according to the perspectives of parents and therapists.METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using the following databases: Medline (PubMed), CINAHL (OVID) and PsychINFO (OVID). Those papers were selected, which focused on collaboration using a two-way interaction between therapists and parents, exploring the perspectives of therapists and/or parents of children between 2 and 6 years. Papers needed to be published in English or Dutch between 1998 and July 2021. Included papers were synthesised using a qualitative analysis approach by two researchers independently. Results sections were analysed line-by-line, and codes were formulated and discussed by all authors. Codes were aggregated, resulting in a synthesis of specific collaboration strategies in combined strategy clusters.RESULTS: The search generated 3439 records. In total, 24 papers were selected. Data synthesis resulted in an overview of specific strategies organised into five clusters: (1) continuously invest time in your collaboration with parents, (2) be aware of your important role in the collaboration with parents, (3) tailor your approach, (4) get to know the family and (5) empower parents to become a collaborative partner.CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review resulted in an overview of concrete strategies for therapists to use in their collaboration with parents of children with developmental disabilities. The strategies formulated enable therapists to consciously decide how to optimise their collaboration with each individual parent. Making these strategies explicit facilitates change of practice

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

Purpose: Developmental language disorder (DLD) is characterized by persistent and unexplained difficulties in language development. Accumulating evidence shows that children with DLD also present with deficits in other cognitive domains, such as executive functioning (EF). There is an ongoing debate on whether exclusively verbal EF abilities are impaired in children with DLD or whether nonverbal EF is also impaired, and whether these EF impairments are related to their language difficulties. The aims of this study were to (a) compare nonverbal performance of preschoolers with DLD and typically developing (TD) peers, (b) examine how nonverbal EF and language abilities are related, and (c) investigate whether a diagnosis of DLD moderates the relationship between EF and language abilities. Method: A total of 143 children (nDLD = 65, nTD = 78) participated. All children were between 3 and 6.5 years old and were monolingual Dutch. We assessed nonverbal EF with a visual selective attention task, a visuospatial short-term and working memory task, and a task gauging broad EF abilities. Vocabulary and morphosyntax were each measured with two standardized language tests. We created latent variables for EF, vocabulary, and morphosyntax. Results: Analyses showed that children with DLD were outperformed by their TD peers on all nonverbal EF tasks. Nonverbal EF abilities were related to mor-phosyntactic abilities in both groups, whereas a relationship between vocabulary and EF skills was found in the TD group only. These relationships were not significantly moderated by a diagnosis of DLD. Conclusions: We found evidence for nonverbal EF impairments in preschool children with DLD. Moreover, nonverbal EF and morphosyntactic abilities were significantly related in these children. These findings may have implications for intervention and support the improvement of prognostic accuracy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) are at an increased risk to develop behaviors associated with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). The relationship between early language difficulties and the occurrence of ASD-related behaviors in DLD is poorly understood. One factor that may hinder progress in understanding this relationship is the etiological heterogeneity of DLD. We therefore study this relationship in an etiologically homogeneous group of children, who share phenotypic characteristics with children with DLD: children with the 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome (22q11DS). We compare children with 22q11DS, to children with DLD and age-matched typically developing children (TD).METHOD: 44 children with 22q11DS, 65 children with DLD and 81 TD children, between 3.0-6.5 years old, participated in a longitudinal cohort study that included a baseline measure and a follow-up measure with a 1-year interval. A parental questionnaire (SRS-2) was used to measure the incidence of behaviors in two key behavioral domains associated with ASD: Social Communication and Interaction and Restricted Repetitive Behaviors and Interests. At baseline, we assessed children's expressive and receptive language abilities as well as their intellectual functioning with standardized tests. We compared the distribution of ASD-related behaviors between the three groups. We used regression analyses to investigate whether language abilities at baseline predict ASD-related behavior at follow-up, accounting for ASD-related behavior at baseline, demographic variables and intellectual functioning. RESULTS: Both the children with 22q11DS and the children with DLD displayed significantly more ASD-related behaviors than the TD children. Over 30% of children in both clinical groups had scores exceeding the subclinical threshold for ASD in both behavioral domains. Both in 22q11DS and DLD, baseline receptive language scores were negatively correlated with ASD-related

BACKGROUND: Indirect speech and language therapy, such as parent-implemented intervention, has been shown to be an effective approach for young children with speech and language disorders. However, relatively few studies have compared outcomes of parent-directed therapy with child-directed intervention, that is, individual therapy of a child delivered by a speech and language therapist (SLT). Although speech and language therapists (SLTs) regard parental engagement as imperative for successful intervention, currently they predominantly use child-directed intervention.AIM: To evaluate the effect of parent- versus child-directed speech-language therapy embedded in usual care intervention for young children with developmental language disorder (DLD).METHODS & PROCEDURES: In a randomized trial, forty-six 3-year-old monolingual children with DLD were assigned to parent-directed intervention or child-directed intervention groups. In addition, all children received usual care in special-language daycare centres. Outcomes included children's language development and functional communication, parents' language output, parents' perceptions and their self-efficacy. These were assessed at three time intervals, that is, at baseline, immediately after 6 months of treatment, and 1 year after baseline. The parent-directed intervention consisted of twelve 50-min sessions every 2 weeks with parent and child, consisting of parental training with immediate feedback by (SLTs. Children in the child-directed intervention group received individual speech-language therapy in weekly 30-min sessions for 6 months.OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Intervention in both groups was equally effective. All children improved significantly in receptive and expressive language measures as well as in functional communication at all intervals. All parents used significantly more language support strategies and were less concerned about their child's participation in communication. Paren

Background: Virtually all children with 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome (22q11DS) experience language difficulties, next to other physical and psychological problems. However, the grammatical skills of children with 22q11DS are relatively unexplored, particularly in naturalistic settings. The present research filled this gap, including two studies with different age groups in which standardized assessment was complemented with spontaneous language analysis. In both studies, we compared children with 22q11DS to children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD), for whom the origin of language difficulties is unknown. Methods: The first study included 187 preschool children (n = 44 with 22q11DS, n = 65 with DLD, n = 78 typically developing; TD). Standardized assessment consisted of grammar and vocabulary measures in both expressive and receptive modality. Spontaneous language during a play session was analyzed for a matched subsample (n = 27 per group). The second study included 29 school-aged children (n = 14 with 22q11DS, n = 15 with DLD). We administered standardized tests of receptive vocabulary and expressive grammar, and elicited spontaneous language with a conversation and narrative task. In both studies, spontaneous language measures indexed grammatical accuracy and complexity. Results: Spontaneous language analysis in both studies did not reveal significant differences between the children with 22q11DS and peers with DLD. The preschool study showed that these groups produced less complex and more erroneous utterances than TD children, who also outperformed both groups on the standardized measures, with the largest differences in expressive grammar. The children with 22q11DS scored lower on the receptive language tests than the children with DLD, but no differences emerged on the expressive language tests. Discussion: Expressive grammar is weak in both children with 22q11DS and children with DLD. Skills in this domain did not differ between the groups, despite

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 betw

BACKGROUND: The ability to communicate is a prerequisite for participation in today's society. To measure participation in adults with communication disorders, the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) was developed in 2006. Since then, several new PROMs have been developed to measure communication and the impact of communication disorders on participation. Moreover, the CPIB items do not all appear to be relevant to certain populations with communication problems and context of communicative participation is changing rapidly, given the increased use of digital communication forms. The purpose of this study was to identify new PROMs developed since 2006 that aim to measure (aspects of) communication, in order to select items that are suitable for expanding the Communicative Participation Item Bank to make the item bank more widely applicable (e.g., to the hearing-impaired population) and tailored to the current societal context.METHODS: Medline and Embase were used to search for PROMs that aim to measure (aspects of) communication. Each new PROM as well as the CPIB, was evaluated to determine to what extent it contains items that measure communicative participation and to what extent these items capture all communicative participation domains by linking each item to the ICF Activities and Participation domains.RESULTS: This study identified 31 new PROMs, containing 391 items that were labelled as measuring communicative participation. The majority of the 391 items measure aspects of ICF Activities and Participation domain 'communication', followed by the domain 'interpersonal interactions and relationships'. The other ICF Activity and Participation domains were less often addressed. Analysis of the CPIB showed that items do not cover all domains of participation as defined in the ICF, such as the 'major life areas' domain.CONCLUSIONS: We found a potential pool of 391 items measuring communicative participation that could be considered

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to gain a comprehensive understanding of participation situations that are challenging for people with communication problems, to provide input for the further development of potential items for the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB).METHOD: A purposive sampling strategy was used to include a diverse group of people with communication problems. Diaries were used as a sensitizing exercise for inductive in-depth interviews. In these interviews, elements of communicative participation situations (concepts) were elicited that participants themselves experienced as difficult because of their communication problem. A thematic content analysis was used to identify overarching themes. In addition, new items were formulated based on the raw codes of the transcripts and linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Activity and Participation domains to examine the distribution of items across the breadth of the construct of communicative participation.RESULTS: Eighteen interviews yielded 44 different concepts. They were clustered in six themes, which capture the person, location, topic, mode, moment, and pace of communication. In total, 103 new items measuring communicative participation were formulated. Most of these items relate to International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Activity and Participation domains "interpersonal interactions and relationships," "major life areas," and "community, social, and civic life."CONCLUSIONS: This study resulted in an overview of self-reported barriers in daily communicative participation experienced by people with communication problems. These communicative participation situations can be captured within 44 concepts, which are covered by six themes. Future work should investigate if the newly written items can be added to the CPIB. The concepts and the themes can be used in designing and delivering a particip

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 backg

Background: There is an increasing amount of research that investigates the needs and wishes of people with aphasia and their relatives with regards to improving the accessibility of communication with healthcare professionals (HCP). An important way to improve this is by training HCP to use supportive conversation techniques and tools. Objectives: This study aimed to inform the development of such a training, by adding to previous findings in the literature regarding the experiences, needs and wishes of people with aphasia and their relatives. We were interested in their experiences with the accessibility of communication and support from HCP and how they believed this can be improved. Methods: An exploratory qualitative research design was chosen. Data was collected through qualitative semi-structured interviews with 20 people with aphasia and 12 relatives. The time post stroke ranged from 3 months to 41 years. Results: Four themes described the data. According to people with aphasia and relatives (1) information transfer in healthcare settings and (2) the use of supported conversation techniques by HCP are inadequate, (3) there is a lack of shared decision-making in healthcare settings, and (4) support, guidance, counseling and education is mainly targeted at the person with aphasia. Conclusions: People with aphasia and relatives reported a variety of positive and negative experiences in all themes. Even though guidelines and interventions have been developed to improve healthcare for people with aphasia and their relatives, we found that people still encounter substantial challenges in access to- and provision of information, shared decision-making, support and communication with HCP. The findings in this study provide some important recommendations for improvement, including the improvement of transfer of information, shared decision-making and individual support for the relatives.

Purpose: Young children with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11DS) often have impaired language development and poor speech intelligibility. Here, we report a comprehensive overview of standardized language assessment in a relatively large sample of preschool-aged children with 22q11DS. We furthermore explored whether speech ability explained variability in language skills. Method: Forty-four monolingual Dutch preschoolers (3–6 years) with a confirmed genetic 22q11DS diagnosis participated in this prospective cohort study. Standardized tests (Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals Preschool-2-NL and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III-NL) were administered. Speech intelligibility was rated by two expert speech and language therapists using a standardized procedure. Results: Most children had impaired language skills across all tested domains. The composite score for expressive language was significantly lower than that for receptive language, but the two were strongly correlated. Only small differences between the mean scores on the various subtests were observed, with the lowest scores for expressive morphosyntactic skills. Language scores showed a moderate positive relation with speech intelligibility, but language abilities varied greatly among the children with intelligible speech. Conclusions: We show that the majority of preschool children with 22q11DS have a broad range of language problems. Other than the relatively larger impairment in expressive than in receptive language skills, our results do not show a clearly delineated language profile. As many of the children with intelligible speech still had below-average language scores, we highlight that language problems require a broad assessment and care in all young children with 22q11DS. Future research using spontaneous language and detailed speech analysis is recommended, to provide more in-depth understanding of children's language profile and the relationship between speech and language i

Purpose: Children with a developmental language disorder (DLD) are often delayed in their grammatical development. This is suggested to be the most important characteristic and clinical marker of DLD. However, it is unknown if this assumption is valid for young children, in the earliest stages of grammatical development. For this reason, this study investigates the complexity, diversity, and accuracy of the grammatical repertoires of 3-to 6-year-old Dutch children with DLD, in comparison to that of typically developing (TD) children matched on grammatical level. Method: Language samples of 59 children (29 children with DLD and 30 TD children) were analyzed using multiple measures of grammatical complexity, diversity, and accuracy. The TD children and children with DLD were language-matched on their grammatical development using the levels of the Dutch version of the Language Assessment, Remediation, and Screening Procedure, the Taal Analyse Remediëring en Screening Procedure (TARSP; Schlichting, 2017). Thus, the children with DLD were significantly older than the TD children (respectively DLD age range: 2;7–5;4 [years;months], Mage = 4;1; and TD age range: 2;0–3;9, Mage = 2;9). Results: The results show that children with DLD are comparable to language-matched TD children in their grammatical accuracy and diversity, but that they produce less complex utterances. Conclusions: The results indicate that children with DLD lag behind in their grammatical complexity as compared to language-matched TD children. The results also suggest that grammatical TARSP level is not sufficiently informative for selecting treatment goals. Instead, the results underline the importance of conducting language sample analyses, with special reference to the complexity of the utterances of a child with DLD.

The adoption of tablets by young children has raised enthusiasm and concern among speech and language pathologists. This study investigated whether tablet games can be used as effectively as real play objects in vocabulary intervention for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). A randomized, controlled non‐inferiority trial was conducted with 70 3‐year‐old children with DLD. The novel intervention group (n = 35) received 12 10‐min scripted intervention sessions with symbolic play using a tablet game spread out over 8–9 weeks. The standard intervention group (n = 35) received the same amount of intervention with real objects using the same vocabulary scripts. In each session, children were exposed to 22 target words. The primary outcome was the number of new target words learned. This was measured using a picture selection task including 22 target words and 22 control words at 3 time intervals: before the intervention, imme-diately post‐intervention, and 5 weeks later. In both intervention groups, the children learned significantly more target words than control words. No significant differences in gains between the two intervention conditions were found. This study provides evidence that vocabulary intervention for toddlers with DLD using a tablet game is equally as effective as an intervention using real ob-jects.

Background: Children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) have a significant deficit in spoken language ability which affects their communication skills, education, mental health, employment and social inclusion. Aim: The present study reports findings from a survey by EU network COST ACTION 1406 and aims to explore differences in service delivery and funding of SLT services for children with DLD across Europe and beyond. Methods and procedures: The survey was completed by 5024 European professionals. COST countries were grouped into Nordic, Anglo-Saxon, Continental, Mediterranean, Central/Eastern and Non-European categories. The use of direct, indirect and mixed interventions, and their relationship to funding available (public, private or mixed) were considered for further analysis. Outcomes and results: The results revealed that for direct therapy, there were more cases than expected receiving private funding. For indirect therapy, fewer than expected received private and more than expected public funding. For mixed therapy, fewer cases than expected received private funding. Conclusions and implications: The results implies that other factors than evidence-based practices, practitioners experience, and patient preferences, drive choices in therapy. More research is needed to gain a better understanding of factors affecting the choice of therapy.