Using Polygenic Profiles to Predict Variation in Language and Psychosocial Outcomes in Early and Middle Childhood.
Dianne F Newbury, Jenny L Gibson, Gina Conti-Ramsden and 3 others
PMID 31425657WHAT IT FOUND
A genetic profile for expressive language in middle childhood weakly predicted expressive language and later peer problems.
The signal was small, and only the peer-problem link held up after chance checks.
Key findings
01A polygenic profile for expressive language at 8 years was the only language score that consistently predicted itself in the replication sample, explaining .18% of trait variance.
02The same expressive language profile predicted peer problems at 11 years, explaining .43% of trait variance, and this was the only result that survived multiple testing correction.
03At the single SNP level, no language measure had a significant association after correction for multiple testing.
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 genetic analysis used only six candidate genes and 1,229 SNPs, so it cannot represent the full genetic contribution to language. The predictive effects were very small: .18% for expressive language and .43% for peer problems. Only one p value survived multiple testing correction, so the genetic findings need replication in larger independent samples. The sample excluded children with autism spectrum disorder or hearing loss and non-White ethnicity, so it may not represent all children seen in speech-language therapy. DLD status was derived from population-level language measures and reported speech or language therapy, not from a clinical diagnosis. The study reports associations and genetic prediction, not treatment effects.
Declared interests
Core support for ALSPAC came from the U.K. Medical Research Council and Wellcome and the University of Bristol. The analysis was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council. Some authors were supported by the National Institute for Health Research, the Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley National Health Service Foundation Trust and King's College London, the LEGO Foundation, and the Arts and Humanities Research Council. The authors state the views are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the National Institute for Health Research, or the Department of Health and Social Care.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat this as a clinical predictor of language disorder or peer problems. The genetic signal was very small, and only one result held up after chance checks.