Grammatical skills of Dutch children with 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome in comparison with children with Developmental Language Disorder: Evidence from spontaneous language and standardized assessment
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
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 clear differences in etiology and cognitive capacities. This was found irrespective of age and assessment method, and highlights the view that there are multiple routes to (impaired) grammar development. Future research should investigate if interventions targeting expressive grammar in DLD also benefit children with 22q11DS. Moreover, our findings indicate that the receptive language deficits in children with 22q11DS exceed those observed in DLD, and warrant special attention.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle