Helping pupils with developmental language disorder

What can teachers do to support children with DLD to better access the curriculum? Dr Susan Ebbels and Sue Marr share their tips for teachers

Speech and Language Q&A Live with Tiny Happy People

Join us for our FIRST EVER Facebook Live, where our special guest presenter will be chatting to our panel of Speech and Language Therapists. They will also be answering your questions throughout the...

Children's language development and parenting advice - BBC Tiny Happy People

A chatty child is a happy child, so Tiny Happy People is here to help you develop your child's communication skills through simple interaction and play.

How to Steer Clear of Illegitimate Treatments for DLD - DLD and Me

Caroline Bowen, A.M., Ph.D. Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia EVIDENCE-BASED SPEECH-LANGUAGE PRACTICES Good practice is based on scientific evidence. It is an agreement between (1), the needs of the child and family, (2), the expertise of the speech-language pathologist (SLP), and (3) the published, peer reviewed research evidence. Conscientious parents everywhere pursue a gamut of approaches, procedures, and activities that are not evidence based. They are tempted for many reasons: The practice is ‘the fashion’, or ‘natural’ or ‘holistic’. It is new or tried-and-true. Someone they trust recommends it. Most of all, they are tempted because they will try almost anything to help their child. Sometimes even credentialed mainstream professionals become involved in delivering suspect treatments, honestly believing they are legitimate and necessary to children’s progress. Here are some tips to help you avoid practices that lack evidence of effectiveness. WHAT DOES ‘LACKING IN EVIDENCE’ MEAN? Saying that an approach is lacking in evidence can mean: sufficient published scientific research has been done to show that the approach has no merit and should not be pursued or recommended. The approach is disproven. little or no scientific research has been done on the approach or the theory it is based on. Therefore, […]

Blame It On Gutenberg

RADLDcampaign on Twitter

“News! News!News! RADLD was nominated for the "Brand the Bus" campaign! Prize includes advertising on a double decker bus and radio advertising. Imagine! Please vote for no. 72 here! https://t.co/ZYRdWMC3qU #DLDday @deevybee @lilacCourt @BeckyClark22 @mcgregor_karla”

Auditory brainstem response deficits in learning disorders and developmental language disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis - Scientific Reports

Although learning disorders (LD) and developmental language disorder (DLD) can be linked to overlapping psychological and behavioral deficits, such as phonological, morphological, orthographic, semantic, and syntactic deficits, as well as academic (e.g., reading) difficulties, they are currently separate diagnoses in the DSM-5 with explicit phenotypic differences. At a neural level, it is yet to be determined to what extent they have overlapping or distinct signatures. The identification of such neural markers/endophenotypes could be important for the development of physiological diagnostic tools, as well as an understanding of disorders across different dimensions, as recommended by the Research Domain Criteria Initiative (RDoC). The current systematic review and meta-analysis examined whether the two disorders can be differentiated based on the auditory brainstem response (ABR). Even though both diagnoses require hearing problems to be ruled out, a number of articles have demonstrated associations of these disorders with the auditory brainstem response. We demonstrated that both LD and DLD are associated with longer latencies in ABR Waves III, V, and A, as well as reduced amplitude in Waves V and A. However, multilevel subgroup analyses revealed that LD and DLD do not significantly differ for any of these ABR waves. Results suggest that less efficient early auditory processing is a shared mechanism underlying both LD and DLD.