Abstract
Purpose Despite the clinical utility of sentence production and sentence repetition to identify language impairment in autism, little is known about the extent to which these tasks are sensitive to potential dialectal variation. One promising method is strategic scoring (Oetting et al., 2016), which has good clinical utility for identifying language impairment in nonautistic school-age children across dialects of English. This report applies strategic scoring to analyze sentence repetition and sentence production in autistic adolescents and adults.
Method Thirty-one diverse autistic adolescents and adults with language impairment (ALI; n=15) and without language impairment (ASD; n=16) completed the Formulated Sentences and Recalling Sentences subtests of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5th Ed (Wiig et al., 2013). Descriptive analyses and regression evaluated effects of scoring condition, group, and scoring condition by group on outcomes, as well as group differences in finiteness-marking across utterances and morphosyntactic structures.
Results Strategic and unmodified item-level scores were essentially constant on both subtests and significantly lower in the ALI than the ASD group. Only group predicted item-level scores. Group differences were limited to: percent grammatical utterances on Formulated Sentences and percent production of overt structures combined on Sentence Repetition (ALI < ASD).
Discussion Findings support the feasibility of strategic scoring for sentence production and sentence repetition to identify language impairment and indicate that potential dialectal variation in finiteness-marking did not confound outcomes in this sample. To better understand the clinical utility of strategic scoring, replication with a larger sample varying in age and comparisons with dialect-sensitive measures are needed.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
TG was supported by T32DC017703 (PD: Eigsti), L70DC021323 (PI: Girolamo) & an ASHFoundation New Investigators Research Grant (PI: Girolamo). SG was supported by an ASHFoundation Graduate Student Scholarship & a University of Kansas Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging Graduate Fellowship (PI: Ghali). CL was supported by R01MH112687 (PI: Eigsti).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB of the University of Connecticut gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Girolamo, T., Ghali, S., & Larson, C. (minor revision). Sentence production and sentence repetition in autistic adolescents and young adults: Linguistic sensitivity to finiteness-marking. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.
Data Availability Statement
The datasets generated during the current study are not publicly available due to participants opting not to share their de-identified individual data in the consent process or due to ongoing analyses. Information about the datasets (structure, code) are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
