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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".