Using Early Standardized Language Measures to Predict Later Language and Early Reading Outcomes in Children at High Risk for Language-Learning Impairments

Abstract

The aim of the study was to examine the profiles of children with a family history (FH+) of language-learning impairments (LLI) and a control group of children with no reported family history of LLI (FH-) and identify which language constructs (receptive or expressive) and which ages (2 or 3 years) are related to expressive and receptive language abilities, phonological awareness, and reading abilities at ages 5 and 7 years. Participants included 99 children (40 FH+ and 59 FH-) who received a standardized neuropsychological battery at 2, 3, 5, and 7 years of age. As a group, the FH+ children had significantly lower scores on all language measures at 2 and 3 years, on selected language and phonological awareness measures at 5 years, and on phonological awareness and nonword reading at 7 years. Language comprehension at 3 years was the best predictor of later language and early reading for both groups. These results support past work suggesting that children with a positive family history of LLI are at greater risk for future language and reading problems through their preschool and early school-age years. Furthermore, language comprehension in the early years is a strong predictor of future language-learning status.

Early Predictors of Language and Social Communication Impairments at Ages 9–11 Years: A Follow-Up Study of Early-Referred Children

“…Our measure of early receptive language, the auditory section of the Preschool Language Scales 3 (UK) (Boucher & Lewis, 1997), emerged as the best allround predictor of language and communication outcomes. This replicates research revealing receptive language to be the strongest predictor of language outcomes, with important implications for early clinical assessment (Desmarais et al, 2008;Flax et al, 2009). However, predictions from receptive language measures are for broad outcome; they do not differentiate between deficits in language structure and social communication observed in older children.…”

“…Hence, slow emergence of language can arise from a multiplicity of child-internal and/or external factors (Desmarais et al, 2008). It is therefore unsurprising that, as Brown pointed out back in 1973, onset and rate of early language development vary widely (Flax et al, 2009) and that many 'late talkers' and children referred to clinical services with concerns about language turn out to be 'late bloomers'. In follow-up studies recruiting children identified as late talkers (at 2 years) or by clinical referral (at 4 years), using different initial and outcome measures, the findings are remarkably similar: with each year from 2 to 5 years, roughly half the children with delay move into the normal range (Bishop & Edmundson, 1987;Dale et al, 2003;Paul, 1996;Rescorla, Dahlsgaard, & Roberts, 2000;Whitehurst & Fishel, 1994).…”

Improving neural response to sound improves reading

“…Benasich and colleagues have conducted prospective, longitudinal studies of infants born into families with or without a family history of language learning impairments. Using both behavioral and electrophysiological methods, they found that individual differences in nonverbal rapid auditory processing thresholds (specifically spectrotemporal processing in the time window important for processing formant transitions in speech) prospectively predict rate of language development and disorders in toddlers (8) and subsequently reading development in early elementary school children (9). These results also are consistent with studies that have demonstrated improved attention, listening, and reading skills in children after a variety of auditory training approaches.…”

Functional characteristics of developmental dyslexia in left-hemispheric posterior brain regions predate reading onset

“…Individuals with DD are often unable to access the underlying sound structures of words, creating a difficulty in mapping sounds to written language (15)(16)(17)(18). Phonological processing skills have been found to be a key predictor of later reading ability in preschool and elementary schoolaged children (19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31). In addition to phonological processing deficits, a range of other linguistic impairments have been observed in infants and prereading children who later exhibit weak reading scores, including speech perception (23,26), syntax production, and comprehension (32)(33)(34)(35), language comprehension (26), receptive vocabulary (22,34), and rapid automatized naming abilities (23,24,34,(36)(37)(38).…”