Korrel Hannah, Mueller Kathryn L, Silk Tim, Anderson Vicki, Sciberras Emma
Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Vic., Australia.
The Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic., Australia.
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;58(6):640-654. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.12688. Epub 2017 Feb 10.
Children with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) appear to have a higher risk of language problems compared with typically developing children, although the types of language problems experienced are less clear. This review aims to establish the types of language problems experienced by children with ADHD according to systematically reviewed literature and determine the empirical evidence for language problems in children with ADHD compared with non-ADHD controls.
A standardized search protocol was used on databases: CINAHL, Medline, and PsychINFO. We identified studies with the following inclusion criteria: (a) confirmed ADHD status at the time of the study, (b) inclusion of a non-ADHD control group, (c) use of a validated language measure, and (d) age ≤ 18. t-Tests, Pearson's r, and Hedges g effect sizes (ES) were calculated using summary statistics. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for the language domain suitable for analysis. Publication bias was investigated using both the trim and fill and p-curve techniques.
Twenty-one studies were included in the systematic review (ADHD = 1,209; Control = 1,101), within which 60 of 68 separate analyses found significant differences between the ADHD and control group on the language measures (p < .05). Follow-up meta-analyses found evidence for large deficits in the ADHD groups overall (10/11 studies met p < .05; weighted mean ES [WMES]: 1.04); expressive (10/10 met p < .05; WMES: 1.23); receptive (12/14 met p < .05; WMES: 0.97), and pragmatic language (4/4 studies met p < .05; WMES: 0.98) compared with controls.
This study demonstrates that children with ADHD have poorer performance on measures of overall, expressive, receptive, and pragmatic language compared with controls. A screening of language functioning may be a valuable addition to the assessment of ADHD.
与发育正常的儿童相比,患有注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)的儿童出现语言问题的风险似乎更高,尽管所经历的语言问题类型尚不清楚。本综述旨在根据系统综述的文献确定ADHD儿童所经历的语言问题类型,并确定与非ADHD对照组相比,ADHD儿童语言问题的实证证据。
对CINAHL、Medline和PsychINFO数据库使用标准化搜索协议。我们确定了符合以下纳入标准的研究:(a)研究时确诊为ADHD,(b)纳入非ADHD对照组,(c)使用经过验证的语言测量方法,(d)年龄≤18岁。使用汇总统计数据计算t检验、Pearson相关系数r和Hedges g效应量(ES)。对适合分析的语言领域进行随机效应荟萃分析。使用修剪填充法和p曲线技术研究发表偏倚。
系统综述纳入了21项研究(ADHD组=1209例;对照组=1101例),其中68项独立分析中的60项发现ADHD组和对照组在语言测量方面存在显著差异(p<0.05)。后续荟萃分析发现,总体而言,ADHD组存在较大缺陷的证据(10/11项研究p<0.05;加权平均效应量[WMES]:1.04);表达性(10/10项研究p<0.05;WMES:1.23);接受性(12/14项研究p<0.05;WMES:0.97)和语用语言(4/4项研究p<0.05;WMES:0.98),与对照组相比。
本研究表明,与对照组相比,ADHD儿童在总体、表达性、接受性和语用语言测量方面表现较差。语言功能筛查可能是ADHD评估的一项有价值的补充。