The utility of parent’s and teacher’s concerns for the screening of speech sound disorders: A study on French-speaking preschool children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Speech sound disorders (SSD) are associated with difficulties in communication, social participation, literacy, and learning. An early identification process is therefore necessary. Our study was aimed at determining the utility and accuracy of parent's and teacher's concerns in screening for SSD. We also aimed to determine whether the accuracy of parent's and teacher's concern varied according to kindergarten grades. For this study, 215 French-speaking preschool children were recruited from preschools. Eighty children were classified as SSD and 135 were classified as Typically Developing (TD). Children were assessed by a standardised single-word speech sound test. Parents and teachers expressed their level of concern about each child's speech development by answering 'no', 'a little' or 'yes' to the same question about their concern. Parents' and teachers' concerns were also gathered in a variable called 'joint concern' to investigate the utility and accuracy of their combined concern. Analyses included tetrachoric correlations, logistic regressions, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and sensibility/specificity analyses. Analyses were employed across all children and within age groups. Results showed positive and significant correlations between the SSD-TD classification, parent's concern, teacher's concern and joint concern. Parents' and teachers' concerns both showed fair specificity rates (85.2% and 88.1%, respectively) but remained under 80% on sensitivity. The joint concern was the most sensitive measure of all (87.3%) but showed a low specificity rate (76.3%). In conclusion, parents' and teachers' concerns both emerged as useful measures for screening for SSD. The combination of their concern revealed how parents and teachers are complementary for SSD screening.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".