Classification of adults for family studies of developmental language disorders

Elena M Plante, Kenneth Shenkman, Melinda M. Clark

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

29 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A variety of approaches has been used to classify the status of adult subjects in familial studies of developmental language disorders. In this report, we directly compare the results of four different methods that appear in the research literature. Two of the approaches rely on case history reports, and two are performance-based methods. Subjects included 24 parents (12 mothers, 12 fathers) of children with developmental language disorders and 24 unrelated adult control subjects (12 female, 12 male) who completed case history items and standardized language testing designed for classification purposes. All classification methods identified more parents than control subjects as "affected." However, classification by case history methods resulted in fewer affected adults than classification through standardized testing. This outcome suggests that the variability in classification rates in studies to date may be the result of method rather than subject sample differences.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)661-667
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
Volume39
Issue number3
StatePublished - Jun 1996

Fingerprint

Language Development Disorders
language
parents
Parents
Fathers
father
Language
Mothers
Developmental Language Disorder
Research
performance
Case History

Keywords

  • Adults
  • Assessment
  • Family aggregation
  • Language disorders

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation
  • Linguistics and Language
  • Health Professions(all)
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Classification of adults for family studies of developmental language disorders. / Plante, Elena M; Shenkman, Kenneth; Clark, Melinda M.

In: Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, Vol. 39, No. 3, 06.1996, p. 661-667.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9dfea20ae7b6430a8531b7fcf51a8293,
title = "Classification of adults for family studies of developmental language disorders",
abstract = "A variety of approaches has been used to classify the status of adult subjects in familial studies of developmental language disorders. In this report, we directly compare the results of four different methods that appear in the research literature. Two of the approaches rely on case history reports, and two are performance-based methods. Subjects included 24 parents (12 mothers, 12 fathers) of children with developmental language disorders and 24 unrelated adult control subjects (12 female, 12 male) who completed case history items and standardized language testing designed for classification purposes. All classification methods identified more parents than control subjects as {"}affected.{"} However, classification by case history methods resulted in fewer affected adults than classification through standardized testing. This outcome suggests that the variability in classification rates in studies to date may be the result of method rather than subject sample differences.",
keywords = "Adults, Assessment, Family aggregation, Language disorders",
author = "Plante, {Elena M} and Kenneth Shenkman and Clark, {Melinda M.}",
year = "1996",
month = "6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "661--667",
journal = "Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research",
issn = "1092-4388",
publisher = "American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Classification of adults for family studies of developmental language disorders

AU - Plante, Elena M

AU - Shenkman, Kenneth

AU - Clark, Melinda M.

PY - 1996/6

Y1 - 1996/6

N2 - A variety of approaches has been used to classify the status of adult subjects in familial studies of developmental language disorders. In this report, we directly compare the results of four different methods that appear in the research literature. Two of the approaches rely on case history reports, and two are performance-based methods. Subjects included 24 parents (12 mothers, 12 fathers) of children with developmental language disorders and 24 unrelated adult control subjects (12 female, 12 male) who completed case history items and standardized language testing designed for classification purposes. All classification methods identified more parents than control subjects as "affected." However, classification by case history methods resulted in fewer affected adults than classification through standardized testing. This outcome suggests that the variability in classification rates in studies to date may be the result of method rather than subject sample differences.

AB - A variety of approaches has been used to classify the status of adult subjects in familial studies of developmental language disorders. In this report, we directly compare the results of four different methods that appear in the research literature. Two of the approaches rely on case history reports, and two are performance-based methods. Subjects included 24 parents (12 mothers, 12 fathers) of children with developmental language disorders and 24 unrelated adult control subjects (12 female, 12 male) who completed case history items and standardized language testing designed for classification purposes. All classification methods identified more parents than control subjects as "affected." However, classification by case history methods resulted in fewer affected adults than classification through standardized testing. This outcome suggests that the variability in classification rates in studies to date may be the result of method rather than subject sample differences.

KW - Adults

KW - Assessment

KW - Family aggregation

KW - Language disorders

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029957729&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029957729&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 39

SP - 661

EP - 667

JO - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

JF - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

SN - 1092-4388

IS - 3

ER -