2016
DOI: 10.33588/rn.62s01.2015526
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

La adaptación al castellano de la Children’s Communication Checklist permite detectar las dificultades en el uso pragmático del lenguaje y diferenciar subtipos clínicos

Abstract: Conclusions. This Spanish version of the CCC is highly valid and reliable. The proposed statistics can be used as normativereference values.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
11

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
5
0
11
Order By: Relevance
“…Además, se aplica a los 50 participantes de la muestra clínica la Prueba de Coherencia Central PCC (Gambra, 2020) y dos cuestionarios a sus padres: Children´s Communication Checklist CCC (Bishop, 1998(Bishop, , 2003Crespo-Eguílaz, Magallón, Sánchez-Carpintero y Narbona, 2016) y Childhood Autism Test CAST (Scott, Baron-Cohen, Bolton y Brayne, 2002), que se detallan a continuación:…”
Section: Instrumentos Y Procedimientounclassified
“…Además, se aplica a los 50 participantes de la muestra clínica la Prueba de Coherencia Central PCC (Gambra, 2020) y dos cuestionarios a sus padres: Children´s Communication Checklist CCC (Bishop, 1998(Bishop, , 2003Crespo-Eguílaz, Magallón, Sánchez-Carpintero y Narbona, 2016) y Childhood Autism Test CAST (Scott, Baron-Cohen, Bolton y Brayne, 2002), que se detallan a continuación:…”
Section: Instrumentos Y Procedimientounclassified
“…The Serbian version of the CCC-2 [25] was redefined by Glumbić and Brojčin [26] to obtain three subscales-General Communication Ability, Pragmatics, and Structural Language Aspects-that would distinguish between clinical samples (ASD, ADHD, DLD). The reliability and validity of the CCC-2 was also found in French in Quebec [27], Portuguese [28], and Spanish [29]. Finally, the Spanish version of the CCC-2 was also used to determine whether the CCC-2 was able to identify pragmatic profiles and discriminate between normative and clinical profiles such as significant language difficulties) or Down syndrome [30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Both the CCC-2 [2] and its initial version, the CCC [63], have been used in different studies to compare the linguistic profiles of different clinical groups, among which are ASD, ADHD, DS and DLD [64,65]. Most studies, however, are focused on English-speaking samples.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies, however, are focused on English-speaking samples. Only a few studies have been carried out with Spanish-speaking children [12,64,66] and none with Galician-speaking children. The differences that exist in the structural and usage (pragmatic) aspects between different languages make it necessary to carry out specific studies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%