Loveall Susan J, Channell Marie Moore, Mattie Laura J, Barkhimer Alexandria E
Department of Special Education and Communication Disorders, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, United States.
Department of Speech and Hearing Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, United States.
Front Psychol. 2022 Aug 12;13:929433. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.929433. eCollection 2022.
Standardized, norm-referenced language assessment tools are used for a variety of purposes, including in education, clinical practice, and research. Unfortunately, norm-referenced language assessment tools can demonstrate floor effects (i.e., a large percentage of individuals scoring at or near the lowest limit of the assessment tool) when used with some groups with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), such as individuals with intellectual disability and neurogenetic syndromes. Without variability at the lower end of these assessment tools, professionals cannot accurately measure language strengths and difficulties within or across individuals. This lack of variability may be tied to poor representation of individuals with NDDs in normative samples. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify and examine common standardized, norm-referenced language assessment tools to report the representation of individuals with NDDs in normative samples and the range of standard/index scores provided. A systematic search identified 57 assessment tools that met inclusion criteria. Coding of the assessment manuals identified that most assessment tools included a "disability" or "exceptionality" group in their normative sample. However, the total number of individuals in these groups and the number of individuals with specific NDDs was small. Further, the characteristics of these groups (e.g., demographic information; disability type) were often poorly defined. The floor standard/index scores of most assessment tools were in the 40s or 50s. Only four assessment tools provided a standard score lower than 40. Findings of this study can assist clinicians, educators, and researchers in their selections of norm-referenced assessment tools when working with individuals with NDDs.
标准化、常模参照语言评估工具用于多种目的，包括教育、临床实践和研究。不幸的是，当与一些患有神经发育障碍（NDDs）的群体（如智力残疾和神经遗传综合征患者）一起使用时，常模参照语言评估工具可能会出现地板效应（即很大比例的个体得分处于或接近评估工具的最低限度）。由于这些评估工具在低端缺乏变异性，专业人员无法准确测量个体内部或个体之间的语言优势和困难。这种变异性的缺乏可能与常模样本中NDDs个体的代表性不足有关。因此，本研究的目的是识别和检查常见的标准化、常模参照语言评估工具，以报告常模样本中NDDs个体的代表性以及所提供的标准/指数分数范围。系统检索确定了57种符合纳入标准的评估工具。对评估手册的编码表明，大多数评估工具在其常模样本中纳入了一个“残疾”或“特殊”群体。然而，这些群体中的个体总数以及患有特定NDDs的个体数量很少。此外，这些群体的特征（如人口统计学信息；残疾类型）往往定义不明确。大多数评估工具的地板标准/指数分数在40多分或50多分。只有四种评估工具提供了低于40的标准分数。本研究的结果可以帮助临床医生、教育工作者和研究人员在与NDDs个体合作时选择常模参照评估工具。
