CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study. Identifying Language Impairments in Children

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
File version

Version of Record (VoR)

Author(s)
Bishop, DVM
Snowling, Margaret J
Thompson, Paul A
Greenhalgh, Trisha
Adams, Catherine
Archibald, Lisa
Baird, Gillian
Bauer, Ann
Bellair, Jude
Boyle, Christopher
Brownlie, Elizabeth
Carter, Glenn
Clark, Becky
Clegg, Judy
Cohen, Nancy
Conti-Ramsden, Gina
Dockrell, Julie
Dunn, Janet
Ebbels, Susan
Gallagher, Aoife
Gibbs, Simon
-Langton, Emma Gore
Grist, Mandy
Hartshorne, Mary
Huneke, Alison
Joanisse, Marc
Kedge, Sally
Klee, Thomas
Krishnan, Saloni
Lascelles, Linda
Law, James
Leonard, Laurence
Lynham, Stephanie
Arnold, Elina Mainela
Mathura, Narad
McCartney, Elspeth
McKean, Cristina
McNeill, Brigid
Morgan, Angela
Murphy, Carol-Anne
Norbury, Courtenay
O'Hare, Anne
Cardy, Janis Oram
O'Toole, Ciara
Paul, Rhea
Purdy, Suzanne
Redmond, Sean
Reilly, Sheena
Restrepo, Laida
Rice, Mabel
Slonims, Vicky
Snow, Pamela
Soppitt, Richard
Speake, Jane
Spencer, Sarah
Stringer, Helen
Tager-Flusberg, Helen
Tannock, Rosemary
Taylor, Cate
Tomblin, Bruce
Volden, Joanne
Westerveld, Marleen
Whitehouse, Andrew
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2016
Size
File type(s)
Location
Abstract

Delayed or impaired language development is a common developmental concern, yet there is little agreement about the criteria used to identify and classify language impairments in children. Children's language difficulties are at the interface between education, medicine and the allied professions, who may all adopt different approaches to conceptualising them. Our goal in this study was to use an online Delphi technique to see whether it was possible to achieve consensus among professionals on appropriate criteria for identifying children who might benefit from specialist services. We recruited a panel of 59 experts representing ten disciplines (including education, psychology, speech-language therapy/pathology, paediatrics and child psychiatry) from English-speaking countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, United Kingdom and USA). The starting point for round 1 was a set of 46 statements based on articles and commentaries in a special issue of a journal focusing on this topic. Panel members rated each statement for both relevance and validity on a seven-point scale, and added free text comments. These responses were synthesised by the first two authors, who then removed, combined or modified items with a view to improving consensus. The resulting set of statements was returned to the panel for a second evaluation (round 2). Consensus (percentage reporting 'agree' or 'strongly agree') was at least 80 percent for 24 of 27 round 2 statements, though many respondents qualified their response with written comments. These were again synthesised by the first two authors. The resulting consensus statement is reported here, with additional summary of relevant evidence, and a concluding commentary on residual disagreements and gaps in the evidence base.

Journal Title

PLoS One

Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume

11

Issue

7

Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement

© 2016 Bishop et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Item Access Status
Note
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject

Clinical sciences not elsewhere classified

Persistent link to this record
Citation
Collections