RAN and PA in Children With RD and/or SLI (De Groot et al., 2015)

Purpose: The objective of this study was to assess and compare the predictive values of group membership for rapid automatized naming (RAN) and phonemic awareness (PA) in Dutch school children with and without reading disabilities (RD) or specific language impairment (SLI).Method: A composite word reading index and a formal SLI diagnosis were used to classify a total of 1,267 children aged 8 to 13 years old either as RD-only (n = 126), SLI-only (n = 21), comorbid (RD+SLI; n = 30), or typically developing (n = 1,090). RAN and PA were assessed with 4 standardized subtests. The clinical subgroups were compared to each other and contrasted with the control group.Results: For each subgroup, results indicate substantial effect sizes of RAN and PA. However, the RD-only group seems to be more affected by poor RAN than the SLI-only group, whereas the 2 groups perform equally poorly on PA. The comorbid group was revealed as most severely impaired on all measurements.Conclusions: In studying RD and SLI, this research indicates that it is important to distinguish between RD-only, SLI-only, and comorbid groups. The comorbid group shows additive effects of both disorders.

研究目的：本研究的目的是评估和比较在荷兰学校儿童中，具有阅读障碍（RD）或特定语言障碍（SLI）以及无阅读障碍或特定语言障碍的儿童群体中，快速自动化命名（RAN）和语音意识（PA）的预测价值。研究方法：采用综合词汇阅读指数和正式的SLI诊断方法，将总共1,267名8至13岁的儿童分为RD单一组（n = 126）、SLI单一组（n = 21）、共病组（RD+SLI；n = 30）或典型发展组（n = 1,090）。使用4个标准子测试来评估RAN和PA。将临床亚组相互比较，并与对照组进行对比。研究结果：对于每个亚组，结果均显示出RAN和PA的显著效应量。然而，RD单一组似乎比SLI单一组更受不良RAN的影响，而在PA方面，两组表现均不佳。共病组在所有测量指标上均显示出最严重的损害。研究结论：在研究RD和SLI时，本研究表明，区分RD单一组、SLI单一组和共病组至关重要。共病组表现出两种障碍的叠加效应。