Convergent Validity of the Cross-Linguistic Lexical Task.

All children were typically developing, with no parental or paediatric concerns and no speech and language therapy referrals, so the results do not show how the CLT-SK behaves in children with suspected developmental language disorder. The sample was mainly middle class and predominantly middle or university educated, and background demographic factors were not analysed, so the relationships may not generalise to more diverse populations. Item-level agreement was only an exploratory analysis of seven words in 30 child-parent dyads, so it cannot establish how the tools agree across the full word lists. The study was cross-sectional, so it cannot show whether vocabulary skills and nonword repetition influence each other over time. Not all children received all measures: the parent checklist was used only for the younger group, and the narrative task was used only for the older group. Some MAIN narratives were shorter than 1 minute, which is considered the minimum for reliable lexical diversity estimates, so narrative-based measures may be limited.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The supplied text reports ethical approval for project APVV 20-0126 but does not state who funded the study or whether a sponsor influenced design, analysis or reporting.

Do not read the significant correlations as proof that the CLT-SK can diagnose developmental language disorder or replace other assessments. The study was done only in typically developing children, and agreement between parent report and child naming was poor for several individual words.