Estimating familial loading in SLI: a comparison of direct assessment versus parental interview.
OBJECTIVE
Two approaches commonly used for estimating prevalence of language disorders in families were compared. The 1st involved examining a subset of language items from an investigator-based interview used to record parental information on the language and literacy difficulties in relatives. The 2nd was the direct assessment of ability in immediate family using a battery of standardized verbal ability, language, and literacy assessments.


METHODS
Using these 2 methods, the prevalence of language and literacy disorders was investigated in the immediate family (n=271) of 93 children with a history of SLI (mean age 13;11 years).


RESULTS
The overall proportion of relatives with reported language or literacy difficulty was similar for both methods (34.5% for reported difficulties compared with 35% on direct assessment). The present study further explored maternal, paternal, and sibling prevalence rates and strength of agreement between parental interview and direct assessment. When a low cutoff score was used, good agreement (of true negatives and true positives) for reading and spelling difficulties and expressive language between the 2 types of case identification method was found.


CONCLUSIONS
Parents can be effective identifiers when the impairment is severe (below 2 SDs from the population mean). Poor agreement was observed between report and assessment of receptive language difficulties.
Human Communication and Deafness, School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. gina.conti-ramsden@manchester.ac.uk
Gina
G
Conti-Ramsden
Zoë
Z
Simkin
Andrew
A
Pickles
D000293:Adolescent; D002648:Child; D015331:Cohort Studies; D005190:Family; D006801:Humans; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D007805:Language Development Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000235:genetics; D007807:Language Tests; D010700:Phonetics; D015995:Prevalence; D014705:Verbal Behavior