Search

Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to investigate how speechlanguage pathologists (SLPs) from Estonia, Finland, and Lithuania rate the significance of different features for diagnosing childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) in their languages. Method: An online survey was conducted among 197 Estonian, Finnish, and Lithuanian SLPs who have worked with children with CAS. The SLPs were asked to rate the significance of 63 features for CAS diagnosis in their respective language. Cross-linguistic patterns in diagnostic features were examined with simple correspondence analysis (SCA) and via descriptive statistics. Results: The ratings revealed six to seven diagnostic features that were considered very significant for CAS diagnosis by the majority of respondents in each country. The SCA highlighted differences between Lithuanian SLPs and Estonian and Finnish SLPs. Some possible language-specific associations were noted, such as palatalization errors for Lithuanian and Estonian and diphthong distortions for Estonian. The respondents from all countries rated highly those features that can easily be applied to most languages (e.g., groping) and gave lower ratings to features that may be influenced by the linguistic structure of different languages (e.g., word stress errors). Conclusions: Overall, SLPs provided high ratings to CAS features that occur universally across languages, whereas features specific to languages, such as prosody-related errors, were not as highly rated. Several language-specific features were highlighted, providing direction for future research and emphasizing the importance of language-specific considerations in CAS research and diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors examined how 12 Estonian-speaking children with specific language impairment (SLI) and 60 children with normal speech development (ND) comprehended compound nouns with differing sequence of the components (first task) and how they produced compound nouns to label genuine and accidental categories by using analogy (second task) and sentence transformation (third task). The results demonstrated that children with SLI were capable of producing compound nouns for genuine categories, but avoided production of compounds to label objects in temporary juxtapositions. However, by comparison with the control group, SLI children differed statistically significantly in terms of both the number of correct answers and the pattern of mistakes. In the cases when compound nouns were expected to be produced by transforming sentences, the results of SLI children were considerably lower than those of their peers. The results of this study support the idea that children with SLI experience difficulties related to processing linguistic information. (Contains 5 tables.)

The identification of language impairment in bilingual children is less straightforward than in monolingual children, as can be seen from misdiagnoses leading to either over- or under-representation in speech and language therapy. Based only on the child's second language, it is difficult to form an expert opinion on the cause of language difficulties: language impairment can be overlooked if difficulties are assumed to come from second language learning, or difficulties with second language learning can be mistakenly ascribed to language impairment (Marinis et al., 2017; Paradis et al., 2021). Bilingual children's language development differs from monolingual development and involves greater variability, due to factors such as age of onset, length of exposure and quantity and quality of input. Moreover, bilinguals should be assessed in both of their languages. A lack of bilingual norms and standardised tools for the assessment of bilinguals is an obstacle to accurate identification and timely intervention. Based on tools developed by the international LITMUS research network (Language Impairment in a Multilingual Society, initially formed through the European Union's COST programme) for assessing bilingual children across many languages (see Armon-Lotem et al., 2015; www.bi-sli.org), this study aims to develop the first version of a sentence repetition assessment in Estonian. More specifically, the study sets forth the goal of identifying which sentence structures and sentences are suited for a sentence repetition task designed to assess children's language processing abilities, in order to identify developmental language disorder (DLD) among bilingual children. In order to be suited for the task, specific sentences and sentence structures must be shown to be feasible for typically developing (TD) bilingual children, and must enable differentiation between TD and DLD bilinguals. We set out the following research tasks and hypotheses: Task 1. To compare sentence repetition accuracy among 5 to 6-year-old TD and DLD monolinguals and bilinguals and determine which sentences and sentence structures are appropriate for the test. Hypothesis 1: Bilingual children were expected to perform with lower accuracy than monolingual children. Hypothesis 2: Bilingual children were expected to have greater difficulty with sentence structures which occur less frequently in the input and place greater demands on language processing. These include complex sentences with subordinate clauses and sentences with complex grammatical forms. Hypothesis 3: Monolingual DLD children were expected to have lower scores on the task than monolingual TD children, and bilingual DLD children were expected to score lower than bilingual TD children. Previous results are mixed regarding whether sequential TD bilinguals should be expected to score higher or lower than age-matched monolingual DLD children (see Hallap et al., 2014; Morgan et al., 2013; Orgassa & Weerman, 2008). In summary, we expected the following results: monolingual TD > bilingual TD; monolingual TD > monolingual DLD; bilingual TD > bilingual DLD; bilingual TD > monolingual DLD (no hypothesis formulated). Task 2. To identify changes to be made in the task. The final version of the task will include 30 sentences for norming, selected on the basis of results of the longer initial version. Sentences will be selected based on those for which (a) bilingual TD children scored with high accuracy; (b) bilingual DLD children performed more poorly, making it possible to differentiate between bilingual TD and DLD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most children born with cleft palate (CP) or cleft lip and palate (CL/P) have velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI), some degree of hypernasal resonance, articulation disorders and laryngeal dysphonia. Combination of different CL/P specific problems may mask laryngeal dysphonia and therefore, it may remain undiagnosed and untreated by clinicians. The research aimed to study the effect of VPI on voice quality in Estonian CL/P children. We included 18 CL/P and 79 healthy children. Combination of objective (Multi-Dimensional Voice Program (MDVP)) and subjective (Pediatric Voice Handicap Index (pVHI), GRBAS scale, video-nasoendoscopy (VNE), video-laryngostroboscopy (VLS)) assessment methods were assisted and performed by our multidisciplinary cleft teams. We found that (1) overall quality of life is greatly affected by voice, resonance and articulation disorders in CL/P group, (2) more than half of the CL/P children had morphological changes of the vocal folds, (3) the severity of VPI did not result in worse outcomes of acoustic parameters of voice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test (MAST) is a brief screening tool for assessing the expressive and receptive language abilities of patients with aphasia. The goal of this study was to adapt and validate the MAST into the Estonian language. The discriminant validity and internal consistency of the test were examined, as well as its sensitivity and specificity. Methods: The MASTest was administered in 50 left hemisphere stroke patients with aphasia (LHA+ group) in the acute phase after the stroke and 126 healthy volunteers in a control group (CG), stratified by age and level of education. Nonparametric tests were used to get normative values, compare the values of the MASTest scores between the LHA+ group and the CG, and to assess the discriminant validity, internal consistency, sensitivity, and specificity of the MASTest. Results: The summary scores: total score (MASTest‐T), expressive score (MASTest‐E), and receptive score (MASTest‐R) correlated with age and educational level, and the normative values were adjusted accordingly. The LHA+ group showed more impairment than the CG in all subtests and summary scores. The internal reliability of the MASTest was high for the whole sample and LHA+ group. The sensitivity and specificity of the MASTest using the 5th percentile were 74% and 94%, respectively, but using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, it was 89% and 80%. Conclusion: The MASTest is a valid screening tool for evaluating expressive and receptive language abilities in Estonian patients with aphasia in early stroke. The MASTest is the first validated aphasia screening test for Estonian‐speaking people, who number less than one million worldwide. The MASTest is a valid screening tool for evaluating expressive and receptive language abilities in Estonian patients with aphasia in early stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]