CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study. Identifying Language Impairments in Children
Delayed or impaired language development is a common developmental concern, yet there is little agreement about the criteria used to identify and classify language impairments in children. Children's language difficulties are at the interface between education, medicine and the allied professio...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2016-07, Vol.11 (7), p.e0158753-e0158753 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | e0158753 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | e0158753 |
container_title | PloS one |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Bishop, D V M Snowling, Margaret J Thompson, Paul A Greenhalgh, Trisha |
description | Delayed or impaired language development is a common developmental concern, yet there is little agreement about the criteria used to identify and classify language impairments in children. Children's language difficulties are at the interface between education, medicine and the allied professions, who may all adopt different approaches to conceptualising them. Our goal in this study was to use an online Delphi technique to see whether it was possible to achieve consensus among professionals on appropriate criteria for identifying children who might benefit from specialist services. We recruited a panel of 59 experts representing ten disciplines (including education, psychology, speech-language therapy/pathology, paediatrics and child psychiatry) from English-speaking countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, United Kingdom and USA). The starting point for round 1 was a set of 46 statements based on articles and commentaries in a special issue of a journal focusing on this topic. Panel members rated each statement for both relevance and validity on a seven-point scale, and added free text comments. These responses were synthesised by the first two authors, who then removed, combined or modified items with a view to improving consensus. The resulting set of statements was returned to the panel for a second evaluation (round 2). Consensus (percentage reporting 'agree' or 'strongly agree') was at least 80 percent for 24 of 27 round 2 statements, though many respondents qualified their response with written comments. These were again synthesised by the first two authors. The resulting consensus statement is reported here, with additional summary of relevant evidence, and a concluding commentary on residual disagreements and gaps in the evidence base. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0158753 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1802585979</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A457357920</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_b05fe311ff764a0082d19f4a344e9925</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A457357920</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c791t-5a13bf7dadba951ca299d74ed694e05cc430672dd1aaeff4dc7aa4dda57670003</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk1Fv0zAQxyMEYmPwDRBEQkLw0GLHdhzzgFSVAZWKJtHBq3WNndSVa4c4QfTb467Z1KA9THlwdPe7v31_-5LkJUZTTDj-sPV968BOG-_0FGFWcEYeJedYkGySZ4g8Pvk_S56FsEWIkSLPnyZnGSciw1lxnnTz2fVsuVhdfkxn6ffedsZBZ3wUTsGpY0SZUJrGxky7Tz9r22xMOvcuaBf6kK66Xu2n6UJp15lqb1ydLsHVPdQ6XewaMO0uZkJqXDrfGKta7Z4nTyqwQb8Y1ovk55fL6_m3yfLq62I-W05KLnA3YYDJuuIK1BoEwyVkQihOtcoF1YiVJSUo55lSGEBXFVUlB6BKAeM5RwiRi-T1UbexPsjBsCBxgTJWMMFFJBZHQnnYyqY1u9ij9GDkTcC3tYS2M6XVco1YpQnGVcVzCggVmcKiokAo1UJkLGp9Gnbr1zutyth1C3YkOs44s5G1_yOpIAXFNAq8GwRa_7vXoZO76Ly2Fpz2_c25i5wxwtFDUFJECwoS0Tf_ofcbMVA1xF6Nq3w8YnkQlTPKOGFcZIdtp_dQ8VN6Z8r4ECsT46OC96OCyHT6b1dDH4JcrH48nL36NWbfnrAbDbbbBG_7w9MNY5AewbL1IbS6ursPjORhjm7dkIc5ksMcxbJXp3d5V3Q7OOQfgIoYJA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1802585979</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study. Identifying Language Impairments in Children</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Bishop, D V M ; Snowling, Margaret J ; Thompson, Paul A ; Greenhalgh, Trisha</creator><contributor>Schiller, Niels O.</contributor><creatorcontrib>Bishop, D V M ; Snowling, Margaret J ; Thompson, Paul A ; Greenhalgh, Trisha ; CATALISE consortium ; Schiller, Niels O.</creatorcontrib><description>Delayed or impaired language development is a common developmental concern, yet there is little agreement about the criteria used to identify and classify language impairments in children. Children's language difficulties are at the interface between education, medicine and the allied professions, who may all adopt different approaches to conceptualising them. Our goal in this study was to use an online Delphi technique to see whether it was possible to achieve consensus among professionals on appropriate criteria for identifying children who might benefit from specialist services. We recruited a panel of 59 experts representing ten disciplines (including education, psychology, speech-language therapy/pathology, paediatrics and child psychiatry) from English-speaking countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, United Kingdom and USA). The starting point for round 1 was a set of 46 statements based on articles and commentaries in a special issue of a journal focusing on this topic. Panel members rated each statement for both relevance and validity on a seven-point scale, and added free text comments. These responses were synthesised by the first two authors, who then removed, combined or modified items with a view to improving consensus. The resulting set of statements was returned to the panel for a second evaluation (round 2). Consensus (percentage reporting 'agree' or 'strongly agree') was at least 80 percent for 24 of 27 round 2 statements, though many respondents qualified their response with written comments. These were again synthesised by the first two authors. The resulting consensus statement is reported here, with additional summary of relevant evidence, and a concluding commentary on residual disagreements and gaps in the evidence base.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158753</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27392128</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Aphasia ; Australia ; Autism ; Behavior disorders ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Canada ; Care and treatment ; Child & adolescent psychiatry ; Children ; Children & youth ; Communication ; Consortia ; Delphi method ; Delphi Technique ; Disability ; Education ; Experimental psychology ; Feasibility studies ; Health aspects ; Humans ; Interdisciplinary Studies ; Ireland ; Jargon ; Language ; Language disorders ; Language Disorders - diagnosis ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; New Zealand ; Pediatrics ; People and Places ; Psychiatry ; Psychology ; Social Sciences ; Specific language impairment ; Speech ; Speech disorders ; Terminology ; United Kingdom</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2016-07, Vol.11 (7), p.e0158753-e0158753</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2016 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2016 Bishop et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2016 Bishop et al 2016 Bishop et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c791t-5a13bf7dadba951ca299d74ed694e05cc430672dd1aaeff4dc7aa4dda57670003</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c791t-5a13bf7dadba951ca299d74ed694e05cc430672dd1aaeff4dc7aa4dda57670003</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2448-4033</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4938414/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4938414/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,724,777,781,861,882,2096,2915,23847,27905,27906,53772,53774,79349,79350</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27392128$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Schiller, Niels O.</contributor><creatorcontrib>Bishop, D V M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Snowling, Margaret J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Paul A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greenhalgh, Trisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CATALISE consortium</creatorcontrib><title>CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study. Identifying Language Impairments in Children</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Delayed or impaired language development is a common developmental concern, yet there is little agreement about the criteria used to identify and classify language impairments in children. Children's language difficulties are at the interface between education, medicine and the allied professions, who may all adopt different approaches to conceptualising them. Our goal in this study was to use an online Delphi technique to see whether it was possible to achieve consensus among professionals on appropriate criteria for identifying children who might benefit from specialist services. We recruited a panel of 59 experts representing ten disciplines (including education, psychology, speech-language therapy/pathology, paediatrics and child psychiatry) from English-speaking countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, United Kingdom and USA). The starting point for round 1 was a set of 46 statements based on articles and commentaries in a special issue of a journal focusing on this topic. Panel members rated each statement for both relevance and validity on a seven-point scale, and added free text comments. These responses were synthesised by the first two authors, who then removed, combined or modified items with a view to improving consensus. The resulting set of statements was returned to the panel for a second evaluation (round 2). Consensus (percentage reporting 'agree' or 'strongly agree') was at least 80 percent for 24 of 27 round 2 statements, though many respondents qualified their response with written comments. These were again synthesised by the first two authors. The resulting consensus statement is reported here, with additional summary of relevant evidence, and a concluding commentary on residual disagreements and gaps in the evidence base.</description><subject>Aphasia</subject><subject>Australia</subject><subject>Autism</subject><subject>Behavior disorders</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Canada</subject><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>Child & adolescent psychiatry</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Children & youth</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Consortia</subject><subject>Delphi method</subject><subject>Delphi Technique</subject><subject>Disability</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Experimental psychology</subject><subject>Feasibility studies</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Interdisciplinary Studies</subject><subject>Ireland</subject><subject>Jargon</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Language disorders</subject><subject>Language Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>New Zealand</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Specific language impairment</subject><subject>Speech</subject><subject>Speech disorders</subject><subject>Terminology</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk1Fv0zAQxyMEYmPwDRBEQkLw0GLHdhzzgFSVAZWKJtHBq3WNndSVa4c4QfTb467Z1KA9THlwdPe7v31_-5LkJUZTTDj-sPV968BOG-_0FGFWcEYeJedYkGySZ4g8Pvk_S56FsEWIkSLPnyZnGSciw1lxnnTz2fVsuVhdfkxn6ffedsZBZ3wUTsGpY0SZUJrGxky7Tz9r22xMOvcuaBf6kK66Xu2n6UJp15lqb1ydLsHVPdQ6XewaMO0uZkJqXDrfGKta7Z4nTyqwQb8Y1ovk55fL6_m3yfLq62I-W05KLnA3YYDJuuIK1BoEwyVkQihOtcoF1YiVJSUo55lSGEBXFVUlB6BKAeM5RwiRi-T1UbexPsjBsCBxgTJWMMFFJBZHQnnYyqY1u9ij9GDkTcC3tYS2M6XVco1YpQnGVcVzCggVmcKiokAo1UJkLGp9Gnbr1zutyth1C3YkOs44s5G1_yOpIAXFNAq8GwRa_7vXoZO76Ly2Fpz2_c25i5wxwtFDUFJECwoS0Tf_ofcbMVA1xF6Nq3w8YnkQlTPKOGFcZIdtp_dQ8VN6Z8r4ECsT46OC96OCyHT6b1dDH4JcrH48nL36NWbfnrAbDbbbBG_7w9MNY5AewbL1IbS6ursPjORhjm7dkIc5ksMcxbJXp3d5V3Q7OOQfgIoYJA</recordid><startdate>20160708</startdate><enddate>20160708</enddate><creator>Bishop, D V M</creator><creator>Snowling, Margaret J</creator><creator>Thompson, Paul A</creator><creator>Greenhalgh, Trisha</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2448-4033</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20160708</creationdate><title>CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study. Identifying Language Impairments in Children</title><author>Bishop, D V M ; Snowling, Margaret J ; Thompson, Paul A ; Greenhalgh, Trisha</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c791t-5a13bf7dadba951ca299d74ed694e05cc430672dd1aaeff4dc7aa4dda57670003</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Aphasia</topic><topic>Australia</topic><topic>Autism</topic><topic>Behavior disorders</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>Child & adolescent psychiatry</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Children & youth</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Consortia</topic><topic>Delphi method</topic><topic>Delphi Technique</topic><topic>Disability</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Experimental psychology</topic><topic>Feasibility studies</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Interdisciplinary Studies</topic><topic>Ireland</topic><topic>Jargon</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Language disorders</topic><topic>Language Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>New Zealand</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Specific language impairment</topic><topic>Speech</topic><topic>Speech disorders</topic><topic>Terminology</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bishop, D V M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Snowling, Margaret J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Paul A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greenhalgh, Trisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CATALISE consortium</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bishop, D V M</au><au>Snowling, Margaret J</au><au>Thompson, Paul A</au><au>Greenhalgh, Trisha</au><au>Schiller, Niels O.</au><aucorp>CATALISE consortium</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study. Identifying Language Impairments in Children</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2016-07-08</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e0158753</spage><epage>e0158753</epage><pages>e0158753-e0158753</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Delayed or impaired language development is a common developmental concern, yet there is little agreement about the criteria used to identify and classify language impairments in children. Children's language difficulties are at the interface between education, medicine and the allied professions, who may all adopt different approaches to conceptualising them. Our goal in this study was to use an online Delphi technique to see whether it was possible to achieve consensus among professionals on appropriate criteria for identifying children who might benefit from specialist services. We recruited a panel of 59 experts representing ten disciplines (including education, psychology, speech-language therapy/pathology, paediatrics and child psychiatry) from English-speaking countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, United Kingdom and USA). The starting point for round 1 was a set of 46 statements based on articles and commentaries in a special issue of a journal focusing on this topic. Panel members rated each statement for both relevance and validity on a seven-point scale, and added free text comments. These responses were synthesised by the first two authors, who then removed, combined or modified items with a view to improving consensus. The resulting set of statements was returned to the panel for a second evaluation (round 2). Consensus (percentage reporting 'agree' or 'strongly agree') was at least 80 percent for 24 of 27 round 2 statements, though many respondents qualified their response with written comments. These were again synthesised by the first two authors. The resulting consensus statement is reported here, with additional summary of relevant evidence, and a concluding commentary on residual disagreements and gaps in the evidence base.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>27392128</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0158753</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2448-4033</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
ispartof | PloS one, 2016-07, Vol.11 (7), p.e0158753-e0158753 |
issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_plos_journals_1802585979 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS); PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
subjects | Aphasia Australia Autism Behavior disorders Biology and Life Sciences Canada Care and treatment Child & adolescent psychiatry Children Children & youth Communication Consortia Delphi method Delphi Technique Disability Education Experimental psychology Feasibility studies Health aspects Humans Interdisciplinary Studies Ireland Jargon Language Language disorders Language Disorders - diagnosis Medicine and Health Sciences New Zealand Pediatrics People and Places Psychiatry Psychology Social Sciences Specific language impairment Speech Speech disorders Terminology United Kingdom |
title | CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study. Identifying Language Impairments in Children |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T02%3A26%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=CATALISE:%20A%20Multinational%20and%20Multidisciplinary%20Delphi%20Consensus%20Study.%20Identifying%20Language%20Impairments%20in%20Children&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Bishop,%20D%20V%20M&rft.aucorp=CATALISE%20consortium&rft.date=2016-07-08&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e0158753&rft.epage=e0158753&rft.pages=e0158753-e0158753&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0158753&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA457357920%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1802585979&rft_id=info:pmid/27392128&rft_galeid=A457357920&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_b05fe311ff764a0082d19f4a344e9925&rfr_iscdi=true |