Cited by 138Language Development and DisordersChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentHearing Impairment and Communication

A systematic review and meta-analysis of predictors of expressive-language outcomes among late talkers

Fisher, Evelyn L.·2017·Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the literature on predictors of outcomes among late talkers using systematic review and meta-analysis methods. We sought to answer the question: What factors predict preschool-age expressive-language outcomes among late-talking toddlers? Method: We entered carefully selected search terms into the following electronic databases: Communication & Mass Media Complete, ERIC, Medline, PsycEXTRA, Psychological and Behavioral Sciences, and PsycINFO. We conducted a separate, random-effects model meta-analysis for each individual predictor that was used in a minimum of 5 studies. We also tested potential moderators of the relationship between predictors and outcomes using metaregression and subgroup analysis. Last, we conducted publication-bias and sensitivity analyses. Results: We identified 20 samples, comprising 2,134 children, in a systematic review. According to the results of the meta-analyses, significant predictors of expressive-language outcomes included toddlerhood expressive-vocabulary size, receptive language, and socioeconomic status. Nonsignificant predictors included phrase speech, gender, and family history. Conclusions: To our knowledge this is the first synthesis of the literature on predictors of outcomes among late talkers using meta-analysis. Our findings clarify the contributions of several constructs to outcomes and highlight the importance of early receptive language to expressive-language development. Supplemental Materials: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.5313454

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1044/2017_jslhr-l-16-0310

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fisher, E. L.
Affiliations
Georgia State University (US)
Corresponding author
Fisher, Evelyn L.
Venue
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
Published
2017-10-17
Volume
60
Issue
10
Pages
2935-2948
ISSN
  • 1092-4388 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-9102
OpenAlex
W2756451836
Cited by
138
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Georgia State University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Hearing Impairment and Communication
Keywords
late talkers, preschool children, expressive vocabulary, receptive language, socioeconomic status, toddlers, language development
MeSH terms
Child, Preschool, Humans, Language Development Disorders, Prognosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review