LSHSS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools Vol.39 44-53 January 2008. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2008/005)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Oetting, J. B.
Right arrow Articles by Cope, R. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Oetting, J. B.
Right arrow Articles by Cope, R. F., III

Articles

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

Janna B. Oetting
Lesli H. Cleveland
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge

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






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.