Cited by 99Language Development and DisordersChild and Adolescent HealthHearing Loss and Rehabilitation

Screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children aged 5 years or younger: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement

Siu, Albert L.·2015·Pediatrics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This report is an update of the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2006 recommendation on screening for speech and language delay in preschool-aged children. METHODS: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children aged 5 years or younger, including the accuracy of screening in primary care settings, the role of surveillance by primary care clinicians, whether screening and interventions lead to improved outcomes, and the potential harms associated with screening and interventions. POPULATION: This recommendation applies to asymptomatic children aged 5 years or younger whose parents or clinicians do not have specific concerns about their speech, language, hearing, or development. RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children aged 5 years or younger (I statement).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2015-1711

Cites

24 of 24 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?

  • Despite AAP recommendations for universal and repeated screening, and despite evidence that timely services can improve long-term DB outcomes, the US Preventive Services Task Force currently rates the evidence for developmental screening as inconclusive, in large part because an unbroken line connecting screening to outcomes has not yet been demonstrated.

    “Despite AAP recommendations for universal and repeated screening, and despite evidence that timely services can improve long-term DB outcomes, the US Preventive Services Task Force currently rates the evidence for developmental screening as inconclusive, in large part because an unbroken line connecting screening to outcomes has not yet been demonstrated.33,34”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Siu, A. L.
Corresponding author
Siu, Albert L.
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2015-08-01
Volume
136
Issue
2
Pages
e474-e481
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W1932470223
Cited by
99
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7
FWCI
23.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Child and Adolescent Health
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Keywords
speech and language delay, speech and language disorders, preschool children, screening, primary care, child development monitoring, screening accuracy, screening harms
MeSH terms
Child, Preschool, Humans, Infant, Language Development Disorders, Early Diagnosis, Early Medical Intervention

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