Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.54 1077-1088 August 2011. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/10-0093)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Materials
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dollaghan, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Horner, E. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dollaghan, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Horner, E. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Article

Bilingual Language Assessment: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy

Christine A. Dollaghana
Elizabeth A. Hornera
a University of Texas at Dallas

Correspondence to Christine A. Dollaghan: dollaghan{at}utdallas.edu

Purpose: To describe quality indicators for appraising studies of diagnostic accuracy and to report a meta-analysis of measures for diagnosing language impairment (LI) in bilingual Spanish–English U.S. children.

Method: The authors searched electronically and by hand to locate peer-reviewed English-language publications meeting inclusion criteria; the authors rated quality features, calculated accuracy metrics and confidence intervals, and generated forest plots.

Results: Of 771 citations (86 unique) located initially, accuracy metrics could be calculated for 17 index measures studied in a total of 100 children with LI and 109 with typical language. Most studies lacked clear descriptions of reference standards, procedures, and controls for subjective bias, making it difficult to rate specific quality features with confidence. Positive likelihood ratios (LR+) for most measures were at least diagnostically suggestive (pooled LR+ = 4.12; 95% CI [2.94, 5.78]). Negative likelihood ratios (LR–) were also generally suggestive, but heterogeneity precluded averaging. For every measure, confidence intervals for LR+ and LR– included diagnostically uninformative values.

Conclusions: The available evidence does not support strong claims concerning the diagnostic accuracy of these measures, but a number appear promising. Several steps are suggested for strengthening future investigations of diagnostic accuracy.

KEY WORDS: bilingual speakers, evidence-based practice, language disorders


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 AJAHome page
C. A. Sanford, T. Schooling, and T. Frymark
Determining the Presence or Absence of Middle Ear Disorders: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review on the Diagnostic Accuracy of Selected Assessment Instruments
Am J Audiol, December 1, 2012; 21(2): 251 - 268.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJSLPHome page
V. Gutierrez-Clellen, G. Simon-Cereijido, and M. Sweet
Predictors of Second Language Acquisition in Latino Children With Specific Language Impairment
Am J Speech Lang Pathol, February 1, 2012; 21(1): 64 - 77.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]