The influence of scale structure and sex on parental reports of children's social (pragmatic) communication symptoms.
Andrea C Ash, Sean M Redmond, Geralyn R Timler and 1 others
PMID 27936954WHAT IT FOUND
Parent-reported pragmatic scores did not form a separate communication profile.
They aligned with language or behaviour problems differently for boys and girls, so CCC-2 scores alone do not clearly distinguish social communication disorder.
Key findings
01Neither the SIDI nor the PC-5 formed a separate group of pragmatic symptoms.
02The SIDI grouped with language measures, while the PC-5 grouped with socioemotional and behavioural difficulties.
03Boys had lower scores than girls on the Nonverbal Communication and Interests scales and on the PC-5 composite.
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 CCC-2 was the only measure used to examine children's social and pragmatic difficulties. The authors state that factor analysis can produce unstable estimates and that the findings are provisional. The authors say multiple assessment methods, such as conversational analysis and peer interaction observation, are generally needed for diagnosis, but this study did not use them.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the CCC-2 as a standalone test that separates social communication disorder from language or behaviour problems. The pragmatic scores grouped with other symptoms, and the authors said the factor analysis results were provisional.