1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Individual and cumulative risk factors in developmental language disorder: A case-control study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Many mental disorders (MD) share common etiology, fuelling debates about the specificity of clinical categories and whether the presence of specific risk factors (RF) can distinguish among them. The study of developmental language disorder (DLD), more specifically, has been further hindered by a lack of consensus regarding its definition. These limitations increase the risk of under-detection and lifelong consequences for affected children. This paper aims (1) to document which individual RF allow differentiating DLD from other MD and (2) to compare the cumulative RF between children with DLD versus other MD. This case-control design study used medical records of a psychiatric sample of 795 preschoolers (mean age 4:11, 75% boys). A logistic regression measured the predictive value of potential RF on DLD. Later first sentences, maternal immigration and family history of language delay were identified as significant in explaining 30% of the variance for DLD diagnosis. An ANCOVA revealed that children with DLD were exposed to a significantly higher number of RF than were children with other MD. Public health policies informed with the knowledge of specific RF associated with DLD, and their cumulative impact, could improve early detection and reduce the cascade of negative consequences associated with DLD.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Stress and the individual. Mechanisms leading to disease.

          This article presents a new formulation of the relationship between stress and the processes leading to disease. It emphasizes the hidden cost of chronic stress to the body over long time periods, which act as a predisposing factor for the effects of acute, stressful life events. It also presents a model showing how individual differences in the susceptibility to stress are tied to individual behavioral responses to environmental challenges that are coupled to physiologic and pathophysiologic responses. Published original articles from human and animal studies and selected reviews. Literature was surveyed using MEDLINE. Independent extraction and cross-referencing by us. Stress is frequently seen as a significant contributor to disease, and clinical evidence is mounting for specific effects of stress on immune and cardiovascular systems. Yet, until recently, aspects of stress that precipitate disease have been obscure. The concept of homeostasis has failed to help us understand the hidden toll of chronic stress on the body. Rather than maintaining constancy, the physiologic systems within the body fluctuate to meet demands from external forces, a state termed allostasis. In this article, we extend the concept of allostasis over the dimension of time and we define allostatic load as the cost of chronic exposure to fluctuating or heightened neural or neuroendocrine response resulting from repeated or chronic environmental challenge that an individual reacts to as being particularly stressful. This new formulation emphasizes the cascading relationships, beginning early in life, between environmental factors and genetic predispositions that lead to large individual differences in susceptibility to stress and, in some cases, to disease. There are now empirical studies based on this formulation, as well as new insights into mechanisms involving specific changes in neural, neuroendocrine, and immune systems. The practical implications of this formulation for clinical practice and further research are discussed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Phase 2 of CATALISE: a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: Terminology

            Background Lack of agreement about criteria and terminology for children's language problems affects access to services as well as hindering research and practice. We report the second phase of a study using an online Delphi method to address these issues. In the first phase, we focused on criteria for language disorder. Here we consider terminology. Methods The Delphi method is an iterative process in which an initial set of statements is rated by a panel of experts, who then have the opportunity to view anonymised ratings from other panel members. On this basis they can either revise their views or make a case for their position. The statements are then revised based on panel feedback, and again rated by and commented on by the panel. In this study, feedback from a second round was used to prepare a final set of statements in narrative form. The panel included 57 individuals representing a range of professions and nationalities. Results We achieved at least 78% agreement for 19 of 21 statements within two rounds of ratings. These were collapsed into 12 statements for the final consensus reported here. The term ‘Language Disorder’ is recommended to refer to a profile of difficulties that causes functional impairment in everyday life and is associated with poor prognosis. The term, ‘Developmental Language Disorder’ (DLD) was endorsed for use when the language disorder was not associated with a known biomedical aetiology. It was also agreed that (a) presence of risk factors (neurobiological or environmental) does not preclude a diagnosis of DLD, (b) DLD can co‐occur with other neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g. ADHD) and (c) DLD does not require a mismatch between verbal and nonverbal ability. Conclusions This Delphi exercise highlights reasons for disagreements about terminology for language disorders and proposes standard definitions and nomenclature.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The impact of nonverbal ability on prevalence and clinical presentation of language disorder: evidence from a population study

              Background Diagnosis of ‘specific’ language impairment traditionally required nonverbal IQ to be within normal limits, often resulting in restricted access to clinical services for children with lower NVIQ. Changes to DSM‐5 criteria for language disorder removed this NVIQ requirement. This study sought to delineate the impact of varying NVIQ criteria on prevalence, clinical presentation and functional impact of language disorder in the first UK population study of language impairment at school entry. Methods A population‐based survey design with sample weighting procedures was used to estimate population prevalence. We surveyed state‐maintained reception classrooms (n = 161 or 61% of eligible schools) in Surrey, England. From a total population of 12,398 children (ages 4–5 years), 7,267 (59%) were screened. A stratified subsample (n = 529) received comprehensive assessment of language, NVIQ, social, emotional and behavioural problems, and academic attainment. Results The total population prevalence estimate of language disorder was 9.92% (95% CI 7.38, 13.20). The prevalence of language disorder of unknown origin was estimated to be 7.58% (95% CI 5.33, 10.66), while the prevalence of language impairment associated with intellectual disability and/or existing medical diagnosis was 2.34% (95% CI 1.40, 3.91). Children with language disorder displayed elevated symptoms of social, emotional and behavioural problems relative to peers, F(1, 466) = 7.88, p = .05, and 88% did not make expected academic progress. There were no differences between those with average and low‐average NVIQ scores in severity of language deficit, social, emotional and behavioural problems, or educational attainment. In contrast, children with language impairments associated with known medical diagnosis and/or intellectual disability displayed more severe deficits on multiple measures. Conclusions At school entry, approximately two children in every class of 30 pupils will experience language disorder severe enough to hinder academic progress. Access to specialist clinical services should not depend on NVIQ.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry
                Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry
                spccp
                CCP
                Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                1359-1045
                1461-7021
                7 July 2022
                January 2023
                : 28
                : 1
                : 398-414
                Affiliations
                [1-13591045221113389] 1Department of Psychology, Ringgold 5622, universityUniversity of Montreal; , Montreal, QC, Canada
                [2-13591045221113389] 2CIUSSS Nord-de-l’Ile-de-Montréal, universityHôpital en santé mentale Rivière-des-Prairies; , Montreal, QC, Canada
                [3 ]School of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, Ringgold 5622, universityUniversity of Montreal; , Montreal, QC, Canada
                Author notes
                [*]Marie-Julie Béliveau, Department of Psychology, University of Montreal, C. P. 6128, succursale Centre-ville, Montreal, QC H3C 3J7, Canada. Email: marie-julie.beliveau@ 123456umontreal.ca
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7695-173X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2370-0539
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6691-0272
                Article
                10.1177_13591045221113389
                10.1177/13591045221113389
                9893307
                35797616
                11c6a648-390f-4428-8206-fc8933b2049d
                © The Author(s) 2022

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                Categories
                Original Article
                Custom metadata
                ts10

                preschool children,child psychiatry,developmental language disorder,risk factors,cumulative risk,clinical study,case–control study,mental disorders

                Comments

                Comment on this article