SLPCohortInternational journal of language & communication disorders2018

Education and employment outcomes of young adults with a history of developmental language disorder.

Gina Conti-Ramsden, Kevin Durkin, Umar Toseeb and 2 others

PMID 29139196

WHAT IT FOUND

At age 24, people with a history of developmental language disorder had fewer higher qualifications and less full-time professional work than peers, but pay did not differ for similar jobs or qualifications.

Key findings

01At age 24, participants with a history of DLD were less likely than peers to hold higher academic qualifications: 10% versus 41% at Level 6 or above, and 18% versus 72% at Level 3 or above.

02Peers were more likely to be in full-time employment and professional occupations.

03Young adults with DLD were less likely than peers to have used a CV, attended an assessment centre, had a face-to-face interview, or had a telephone interview, and only 15% had asked for special arrangements at interview.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The DLD group was 84 of the original 242 children, so 35% of the cohort participated at age 24; attrition could affect generalisability, although the authors found no significant differences on earlier language, cognitive, or educational variables between those who did and did not continue. Educational qualifications, GCSE grades, and support received were self-reported and not independently verified. Income was reported in broad bands, not exact salaries, and some occupational categories had few participants, so interactions could not be tested. Standard language and reading tests had normative limits for adults; CELF-4 was normed up to age 21;11 and WORD reading was normed up to age 16;11, so raw scores were used for some reading analyses. This was an observational comparison at age 24, so it cannot prove that DLD caused the differences; nonverbal IQ and reading also differed and may influence outcomes. The sample came from children who attended language units in England and were considered to need a structured setting, so it may not represent all people with DLD, including those in mainstream school or with milder difficulties.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the similar income and NEET rates as proof that developmental language disorder no longer affects adult participation. The group still had fewer higher qualifications, less full-time employment, fewer professional jobs, and longer unemployment among those who were unemployed. This is an observational study, so it cannot show that DLD caused the differences.

Read it on PubMed →