Reliability, validity and developmental sensitivity of the Language Use Inventory (LUI) in the Chinese context.
Lu Qian, Huan Shao, Hui Fang and 8 others
PMID 34984773WHAT IT FOUND
The Mandarin Chinese version of the Language Use Inventory accurately distinguishes children with autism from typically developing peers and tracks pragmatic development from 18 to 47 months.
It is a valid parent-report tool for assessing social communication skills in this age group.
Key findings
01The tool correctly classified 90.7% of children, with 88.4% sensitivity and 93% specificity, when distinguishing those with autism from typically developing peers.
02Children with autism had significantly lower total scores (mean 28.44) than typically developing children (mean 115.91).
03Total scores increased with age, and gesture scores decreased as verbal scores increased, reflecting typical developmental shifts.
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 study did not establish concurrent validity by comparing results with another standardized pragmatic test. The sample size was moderate, and the researchers note that a larger norming study is needed to confirm age and sex differences. The tool has not yet been fully normed for clinical use in China, so scores should be interpreted with caution outside this research context.
Declared interests
The last author is the founder and president of the company that holds the copyright to and commercially publishes the original English version of the Language Use Inventory. The company receives proceeds from the LUI, and the author is a beneficiary of these proceeds. Other authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume this tool is ready for routine clinical diagnosis in China. The authors state it is a promising tool requiring further norming, and concurrent validity against other standardized tests was not established.