HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Oetting, J. B. Articles by Cope, R. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Oetting, J. B. Articles by Cope, R. F., III Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Empirically Derived Combinations of Tools and Clinical Cutoffs: An Illustrative Case With a Sample of Culturally/Linguistically Diverse Children

Robert F. Cope, III
Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond

Contact author: Janna B. Oetting, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, 64 Hatcher Hall, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803. E-mail: cdjanna{at}lsu.edu.

Purpose: Using a sample of culturally/linguistically diverse children, we present data to illustrate the value of empirically derived combinations of tools and cutoffs for determining eligibility in child language impairment.

Method: Data were from 95 4- and 6-year-olds (40 African American, 55 White; 18 with language impairment, 77 without) who lived in the rural South; they involved primarily scores from the Comprehension subtest of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition (CSSB; R. Thorndike, E. Hagen, & J. Sattler, 1986), but scores from an experimental nonword repetition task (NRT; C. Dollaghan & T. Campbell, 1998) were also included as supplements to these scores.

Results: Although the CSSB led to low fail rates in children without impairment and a statistically reliable group difference as a function of the children's clinical status but not their race, only 56% of children with impairment were accurately classified when –1 SD was employed as the cutoff. Diagnostic accuracy improved to 81% when an empirically derived cutoff of –.5 SD was used. When scores from the NRT were added to those from the CSSB, diagnostic accuracy increased to 90%.

Implications: This illustrative case adds to the growing number of studies that call for empirically derived combinations of tools and cutoffs as one option within an evidence-based practice framework.

KEY WORDS: assessment, child language disorders, cultural/linguistic diversity

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. F. Stokes and T. Klee The Diagnostic Accuracy of a New Test of Early Nonword Repetition for Differentiating Late Talking and Typically Developing Children J Speech Lang Hear Res, August 1, 2009; 52(4): 872 - 882. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. H. Finestack and M. E. Fey Evaluation of a Deductive Procedure to Teach Grammatical Inflections to Children With Language Impairment Am J Speech Lang Pathol, August 1, 2009; 18(3): 289 - 302. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]