Initial studies of the phenotype and persistence of speech motor delay (SMD).
Lawrence D Shriberg, Thomas F Campbell, Heather L Mabie and 1 others
PMID 31221011WHAT IT FOUND
Among children with idiopathic speech delay, speech motor delay was associated with lower speech and language scores.
In 14 treated children, 3 still met criteria after 9 years; 11 did not before 9. No early speech or demographic variable was associated with persistence.
Key findings
01Of 415 children with idiopathic speech delay, 50 met criteria for speech motor delay, and they had lower speech and language scores than the 341 children with no motor speech disorder.
0210 of 32 speech motor delay signs were positive in at least 26 of 50 children, and the most frequent signs involved speech, prosody, and voice.
03In 14 treated children, 3 still met speech motor delay criteria after 9 years, 11 did not meet criteria before 9, and none of 11 early demographic or speech comparisons showed a difference associated with persistence.
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.
What it does not show
The classification measures for speech motor delay, childhood dysarthria, and childhood apraxia of speech are new and need replication for internal and external validity. The persistence analysis used only 14 children selected from 104 retrospective records, so it cannot estimate how common persistent speech motor delay is. Some children had no conversational sample between 6 and 9 years, so the timing of normalization cannot be pinned down. The data were retrospective, and the study did not compare treated and untreated children, so it cannot show whether treatment changed the course of speech motor delay. The high and low prevalence sites differed in age and prior treatment history, so site differences in speech motor delay prevalence are confounded. The study did not show that speech motor delay is quantitatively distinct from childhood dysarthria or childhood apraxia of speech. Language measures were too diverse to test whether language impairment differs between children with speech delay with and without speech motor delay.
Declared interests
The authors report no declarations of interest. The article is listed as supported by NIH extramural research.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the 11 of 14 children who no longer met criteria by 9 years as evidence that treatment worked. The children had received speech delay treatment, and the study did not compare treated and untreated groups, so it cannot show what caused the change.