Search

Background: Public awareness of Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) is lower than other neurodevelopmental disorders, despite its high prevalence of 7.6%. This lower awareness means recruitment for DLD research studies is difficult. DLD is both underfunded and under-researched, resulting in relatively limited research investigating individuals with DLD. Engage with Developmental Language Disorder (E-DLD) is a response to these considerations. E-DLD is the first international participant database of those affected by DLD. Parents of children with DLD under 16 and young people and adults over 16 from anywhere in the world can sign up to be a part of the E-DLD. Aims: This paper aims to describe the families of children with DLD and adults with DLD in the database thus far. Methods & Procedures: E-DLD members sign up via our website, reporting demographic characteristics as part of this procedure. We request all E-DLD members subsequently fill in a yearly survey. The content of the yearly survey changes dependent on the age of the child, while the yearly survey for adults remains consistent. We measure a wide range of domains, such as speech and language therapy (SLT) support, school support, socialisation skills, and early developmental milestones for our youngest members, and health care support and mental well-being measurements for our adults. We also collect parent and self-reported reflections on strengths and challenges for the person with DLD using open-ended questions and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Outcomes & Results: The database currently consists of 196 parents of children with DLD and 20 individuals over the age of 16 with DLD or suspected DLD across a range of socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds. Our initial results confirm that E-DLD members meet the linguistic profile of DLD in relation to self- or parent-rated language difficulties. Both children and adults show increased rates of psychosocial difficulties compared to established norms, consistent with past research on clinical samples of people with DLD. Conclusions & Implications: The findings indicate that a participant database for DLD research is feasible and useful. The rates of emotional, behavioural and sleep difficulties among the child probands are higher than reported rates amongst typically developing children. Initial data indicate that adults with DLD have poorer well-being than their peers. The E-DLD is a useful collection of data on those affected by DLD and is a promising method for connecting people with DLD with academic researchers.

Background: The communication skills of older adults living in care homes is an underexplored topic. Ageing can lead to reduced communication ability and activity; and in the care home environment there may also be fewer communication opportunities. This situation is likely to negatively impact well-being. Previous reviews have found evidence of the effectiveness of behavioural interventions in increasing well-being, but no systematic review to date has focused specifically on the evidence base for group language and communication interventions in this population. Aims: To identify and evaluate the evidence for behavioural interventions with older adults, delivered in groups in care homes, that specifically included a language or communication activity. To explore the impact of such intervention on the specific domains of language, communication and social interaction. To determine whether behavioural mechanisms of action can be identified. Methods & Procedures: Embase, Medline, Ovid Nursing database, Psych info and CINAHL complete were searched and produced 158 records for screening, of which 22 remained for review. In order to identify and evaluate the quality of the evidence base presented the following research questions were posed: What research has been conducted in this area? What is the methodological quality of the studies identified? How complete is the intervention reporting? How was change measured in the domains of language, communication and social interaction? Is there evidence of efficacy, indicated by statistically significant improvement, in these domains? How did the interventions work? Synthesis tools employed included the PEDro-P Scale, the TIDieR checklist and the ITAX. Main contribution: A total of 22 studies met the criteria for review. One study used solely language or communication interventions, but the remaining 21 studies used behavioural interventions which incorporated language and communication activities to varying degrees. Studies fell into four broad intervention types: reminiscence or life review; cognitive stimulation; narrative or storytelling; and multi-modality group communication. The majority of studies were of fair methodological quality, with a moderate level of detail provided in treatment reporting. Statistically significant improvement was reported by authors in all four intervention types and across language, communication and social domains. Social interaction, social support and behavioural skills were the most consistent mechanisms of action in the reviewed behavioural interventions. Conclusions & Implications: Despite limitations in the evidence base, there are important positive signs for the beneficial effects of supporting language and communication in care homes. Blinding of assessors, and the accuracy and accessibility of statistical reporting are important areas to address in order to improve the quality of the evidence base.

Executive functions (EFs) in both regulatory and meta-cognitive contexts are important for a wide variety of children's daily activities, including play and learning. Despite the growing literature supporting the relationship between EF and language, few studies have focused on these links during everyday behaviours. Data were collected on 208 children from 6 to 12 years old of whom 89 were deaf children (55% female; M  = 8;8; SD  = 1;9) and 119 were typically hearing children (56% female, M  = 8;9; SD  = 1;5). Parents completed two inventories: to assess EFs and language proficiency. Parents of deaf children reported greater difficulties with EFs in daily activities than those of hearing children. Correlation analysis between EFs and language showed significant levels only in the deaf group, especially in relation to meta-cognitive EFs. The results are discussed in terms of the role of early parent–child interaction and the relevance of EFs for everyday conversational situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Accessibility of data visualization has been explored for users with visual disabilities but the needs of users with language disabilities have seldom been considered. Aim: This scoping review synthesised what is known about data visualization for adults with language disabilities, specifically the acquired language disability, aphasia and Developmental Language Disorder. It sought to extract key findings and identify what practices support effective visualization for decision making for people with language disabilities. Method: Papers were included if they investigated visualization of data, and the consumers of the data visualization were people with aphasia or developmental language disability. Seven databases were searched: CINAHL, Academic Search, Medline, PsychINFO, Ovid, ACM Digital Library and IEEE Xplore. Included studies were charted to extract title, author(s), year, country, paper type, scientific field, participant number(s), participant group(s), main topic, subtopic, method, task description, task category, data visualization, summary, key findings relevant to the review question, and guidelines or recommendations. Narrative synthesis was used to describe how people with language disability have interacted with data visualization from a range of literature. Main Contribution: Six studies (seven publications) were included in the review. One study came from the field of health, one from a disability rights collaboration and four studies from computer science. No studies satisfying the review criteria explored data visualization for Developmental Language Disorder; however, five studies explored participants with cognitive disabilities that included impairments of language, so these were included. A range of visualization designs were found. Studies predominantly explored understanding of visualization (4/6). One study explored how to express data visually, and one explored the use of the visualization that is, for an action, choice, or decision. Cognitively accessible data visualization practices were described in four papers and synthesized. Supportive practices reported were reducing the cognitive load associated with processing a visualization and increasing personal relevance of data visualization. Conclusion: Accessible data visualization for adults with aphasia and Developmental Language Disorder has only minimally been explored. Practices to specifically support users with language disability are not yet apparent. As data use in making everyday decisions is widespread, future research should explore how people with language disabilities make use of data visualization. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Visual resources are used widely to support people with language disabilities in understanding of language. That is, icons, maps timelines and so forth, are used to support auditory processing. However, data visualization is used routinely by people without a language disability to support everyday decisions for example, visualization of live traffic data is used to provide users with the best route to their destination. It is unclear whether any work has explored data visualization for people with language disabilities. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This paper brings together research on the use of data visualization by adults with either Developmental Language Disorder or aphasia, collectively people with language disabilities. It highlights a gap in the design of inclusive data visualization for language disabilities and the minimal research exploring the use of data visualization for decision making in these populations. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Access to data can be empowering. It has potential to enable agency in decisions and increase social participation. The existing gap in knowledge about how to design inclusive data visualization for people with language disabilities thus poses a risk of exclusion and threats to informed decision making. Highlighting the current field of literature may drive research and clinical activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Stroke survivors with aphasia want to improve their everyday talking (discourse). In current UK practice, 90% of speech and language therapists believe discourse assessment and treatment is part of their role but are hampered by barriers in resources, time and expertise. There is a clinical need for well-articulated discourse assessment and treatments. LUNA is a multi-level treatment targeting words, sentences and discourse macrostructure in personal stories that addresses this clinical need. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of LUNA trial procedures in a randomised waitlist-controlled trial; and to evaluate preliminary efficacy. Methods: This paper reports a phase II, waitlist-controlled, proof-of-concept feasibility trial. Participants with chronic aphasia (n = 28) were recruited from the community and randomised to an Immediate (n = 14) or Delayed (n = 14) group. LUNA treatment was delivered twice weekly for 10 weeks via the videoconferencing technology, Zoom. Feasibility was assessed in terms of participant recruitment and retention, adherence, missing data, and treatment fidelity. Preliminary treatment efficacy was assessed in terms of between group differences in outcome measures relating to discourse, language, and psychosocial state. Results: The remote LUNA trial was feasible: 85% of those eligible consented to the trial; trial retention was 86%; 87% of treatment sessions were delivered as scheduled, and 79% of participants completed 80%+ of the treatment programme; data was missing only for participants who withdrew; treatment fidelity was high at 92% adherence; and only one clinical outcome measure demonstrated ceiling effects. ANCOVA analysis of the clinical outcome measures revealed group differences with medium and large effect sizes, indicating, improvements in the production of words, sentences, discourse macrostructure, overall language functioning (WAB-R), and psychosocial state (VAMS) following LUNA treatment. For most outcomes measured, similar treatment benefits were suggested in a secondary, non-parametric analysis. Conclusions: Large-scale evaluation of the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of LUNA is warranted and supported by these findings. Trial registration: Clinical trials registration: NCT05847023 (clinical trials.gov). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Support for school-age children with speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) usually takes place within the school setting. Successful outcomes for children with SLCN rely on effective collaborative working between speech and language therapists (SLTs), school staff and families. We need to understand the current evidence regarding the joint working practices, relationships and collaboration experiences of SLT and teaching staff within mainstream primary schools, in order to identify whether sufficient research exists for a systematic review within this field, and to inform practice. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify what research currently exists regarding collaboration, roles and relationships of SLTs and teaching staff within mainstream UK primary schools, and clarify the nature, participants and concepts described within this literature. A scoping review framework was used, consisting of identification of the review objectives, identification of relevant studies, study selection and iterative searches, data charting and reporting of the results. Information regarding research question, participants, data collection and analysis and terms used for key concepts was extracted. This scoping review identified 14 papers, however, collaboration was the primary focus of only 5 of these. Clarity and perceptions of roles were key themes within six of the papers. Whilst facilitators and barriers to collaboration are discussed in all 14 papers, only 4 studies aimed to investigate barriers and facilitators. Teaching assistant (TA) views are underrepresented within the research. Drawing conclusions from the body of research is challenging due to the varied ways in which the key concept 'collaboration' is used. Currently, there is insufficient literature to carry out a systematic review. This scoping review highlights the need for research that considers collaboration within the complex social network of school staff (including TAs) and SLTs, in order to ensure that future guidance is rooted in research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Very young children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds often show poorer language development. Whilst there have been attempts to provide early intervention programmes, these sometimes miss the most disadvantaged groups. Aims: This report presents preliminary feasibility and effectiveness data for a novel language intervention designed for parents of toddlers in the United Kingdom. Methods and Procedures: In total, 43 UK families of 2–4‐year‐olds were recruited to the study, half of whom completed an 8‐week course (Tots Talking) focussed on parent interaction, and half of whom acted as wait‐list controls. Results and Outcomes: Results suggest that such programmes are feasible for families with 86% staying in the intervention. In addition, greater changes in underlying communication skills such as joint attention and gesture were evident compared to wait‐list controls. Conclusions and Implications: We conclude that pre‐verbal skills may be more important to measure as initial outcomes than language or vocabulary change in this population. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds are at higher risk of communication difficulties and there is a need for community intervention programmes for very young children. What this study adds: This study suggests that such programmes can be feasible and effective, but that very early/basic communicative skills (such as joint attention) may be boosted first rather than language or vocabulary. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Children's centres and other community services could feasibly run short parent facing courses emphasising contingent communication in low SES families and other diverse groups. These may be more successful run with younger preschoolers. Joint attention may be a better focus of intervention before expecting vocabulary or language change. Community health professionals may find this information useful in referring and supporting families in need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public awareness of Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) is lower than other neurodevelopmental disorders, despite its high prevalence of 7.6%. This lower awareness means recruitment for DLD research studies is difficult. DLD is both underfunded and under‐researched, resulting in relatively limited research investigating individuals with DLD. Engage with Developmental Language Disorder (E‐DLD) is a response to these considerations. E‐DLD is the first international participant database of those affected by DLD. Parents of children with DLD under 16 and young people and adults over 16 from anywhere in the world can sign up to be a part of the E‐DLD. Aims: This paper aims to describe the families of children with DLD and adults with DLD in the database thus far. Methods & Procedures: E‐DLD members sign up via our website, reporting demographic characteristics as part of this procedure. We request all E‐DLD members subsequently fill in a yearly survey. The content of the yearly survey changes dependent on the age of the child, while the yearly survey for adults remains consistent. We measure a wide range of domains, such as speech and language therapy (SLT) support, school support, socialisation skills, and early developmental milestones for our youngest members, and health care support and mental well‐being measurements for our adults. We also collect parent and self‐reported reflections on strengths and challenges for the person with DLD using open‐ended questions and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Outcomes & Results: The database currently consists of 196 parents of children with DLD and 20 individuals over the age of 16 with DLD or suspected DLD across a range of socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds. Our initial results confirm that E‐DLD members meet the linguistic profile of DLD in relation to self‐ or parent‐rated language difficulties. Both children and adults show increased rates of psychosocial difficulties compared to established norms, consistent with past research on clinical samples of people with DLD. Conclusions & Implications: The findings indicate that a participant database for DLD research is feasible and useful. The rates of emotional, behavioural and sleep difficulties among the child probands are higher than reported rates amongst typically developing children. Initial data indicate that adults with DLD have poorer well‐being than their peers. The E‐DLD is a useful collection of data on those affected by DLD and is a promising method for connecting people with DLD with academic researchers. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on this subject: Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) is characterised by expressive and/or receptive language difficulties in the absence of another biomedical condition that could explain these difficulties. It is critically under‐researched and underfunded. As such, there is a lack of public awareness and difficulty recruiting sufficient sample sizes for DLD research studies. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Engage with Developmental Language Disorder (E‐DLD) is the first international participant database of individuals with DLD. This paper provides a preliminary report on the profile of linguistic and psychosocial skills among the individuals on the database, adding to current understanding of DLD across age groups. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Our aim is that the E‐DLD will provide much‐needed facilitation of research into DLD. E‐DLD will enable those with DLD and their families more readily to shape research agendas and to participate in studies that interest them. Families may be recruited into research that could directly translate to better clinical treatment of DLD. We also believe that the E‐DLD yearly survey holds potential to provide key information on the development and longitudinal experience of children and adults with DLD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spoken narrative skills are important for adolescents in their everyday lives. Previous research suggests that producing well-structured and coherent narratives may be challenging for autistic young people. Mentalising, also known as "advanced Theory of Mind" (ToM) and "Executive Function" (EF) are two cognitive abilities frequently explored in relation to autism, both of which may be implicated in narrative ability. The present study investigated these relationships in a group of autistic adolescents (N = 44) aged 11-15 years and a comparable non-autistic group (N = 54) that did not significantly differ on age, sex, nonverbal cognitive ability, or receptive/expressive language skills. Participants were assessed on a video-based spoken narrative task, scored for both overall structure ("story grammar") and narrative coherence. A battery of tasks measuring mentalising and EF (working memory, inhibition, shifting, generativity) was also administered. Relationships between scores on cognitive measures and narrative performance were investigated using hierarchical linear regression analyses. Mentalising scores were found to significantly predict narrative performance across all outcome measures and were a stronger predictor than diagnostic group. Diagnostic group predicted narrative structure ("story grammar") scores but not coherence scores. EF scores were not predictive of narrative ability in this sample. Mentalising skills appear to play an important role for both autistic and non-autistic adolescents in the generation of narrative structure and coherence within spoken accounts., (© 2024 The Author(s). Autism Research published by International Society for Autism Research and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objectives: To descriptively compare and contrast intervention techniques for preschool children with features of developmental language disorder (outcome: oral vocabulary) and speech sound disorder (outcome: speech comprehensibility) and analyse them in relation to effectiveness and theory., Design: This is a systematic review with narrative synthesis. The process was supported by an expert steering group consisting of relevant professionals and people with lived experience., Data Sources: Ovid Emcare, MEDLINE Complete, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, ERIC, and Communication Source from January 2012 were searched. Relevant studies were obtained from an initial published review (up to January 2012)., Eligibility Criteria: Interventions for preschool children (80% aged 2:0-5:11 years) with idiopathic speech or language needs; outcomes relating to either oral vocabulary or speech comprehensibility., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Searches were conducted on 27 January 2023. Two independent researchers screened at abstract and full-text levels. Data regarding intervention content (eg, techniques) and format/delivery (eg, dosage, location) were extracted. Data were synthesised narratively according to the methods of Campbell et al ., Results: 24 studies were included: 18 for oral vocabulary and 6 for speech comprehensibility. There were 11 randomised controlled trials, 2 cohort studies and 11 case series. Similarities included a focus on input-related techniques and similar therapy activities. Speech studies were more likely to be professional-led and clinic-led, rather than at home and through a parent. Analysis was restricted by heterogeneity in study design and terminology, as well as gaps within intervention reporting. Information deemed important to the expert steering group was missing., Conclusions: Similarities and differences between intervention techniques for oral vocabulary and speech comprehensibility have been identified and synthesised. However, analysis of effectiveness was limited due to issues with study design and heterogeneity within studies. This has implications for the progression of the evidence base within the field., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42022373931., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)