Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026
Latent Classes of Typical and Atypical Speech Development in Low-Income Children: A Longitudinal Study From Early Childhood to Adolescence.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Liu Qingyang, Tumanova Victoria, Razza Rachel A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to identify distinct latent classes of speech development by differentiating typical and atypical developmental trajectories from early childhood through adolescence in children from low-income families. It also examined demographic predictors of these latent classes and explored their associations with early infant temperament.
METHOD: We used five waves of longitudinal data from the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study, with families from low-income backgrounds below 200% of the federal poverty line (N = 2,802). First, we conducted a longitudinal latent class analysis (LLCA) on six indicators of speech problems and stuttering reported by mothers at 3, 5, 9, and 15 years of age. Second, we examined demographic predictors to distinguish longitudinal latent class membership. Third, we assessed early infant temperament to predict longitudinal latent class membership.
RESULTS: LLCA identified three distinct speech development classes: typical speech development (n = 2,383, 85%); speech problem, not stuttering (n = 322, 11.5%); and persistent stuttering (n = 97, 3.5%). Compared to the typical speech development class, boys had a higher likelihood of belonging to the speech problem, not stuttering class or the persistent stuttering class. Children in the speech problem, not stuttering class exhibited greater levels of emotionality than did children in the typical speech development class.
CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the need for early identification and intervention for low-income children at risk of early speech problems and the necessity to adopt comprehensive and multilayer intervention across developmental transition stages.
METHOD: We used five waves of longitudinal data from the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study, with families from low-income backgrounds below 200% of the federal poverty line (N = 2,802). First, we conducted a longitudinal latent class analysis (LLCA) on six indicators of speech problems and stuttering reported by mothers at 3, 5, 9, and 15 years of age. Second, we examined demographic predictors to distinguish longitudinal latent class membership. Third, we assessed early infant temperament to predict longitudinal latent class membership.
RESULTS: LLCA identified three distinct speech development classes: typical speech development (n = 2,383, 85%); speech problem, not stuttering (n = 322, 11.5%); and persistent stuttering (n = 97, 3.5%). Compared to the typical speech development class, boys had a higher likelihood of belonging to the speech problem, not stuttering class or the persistent stuttering class. Children in the speech problem, not stuttering class exhibited greater levels of emotionality than did children in the typical speech development class.
CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the need for early identification and intervention for low-income children at risk of early speech problems and the necessity to adopt comprehensive and multilayer intervention across developmental transition stages.