2004
DOI: 10.1597/04-128
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spontaneous Verbal Labeling: Visual Memory and Reading Ability in Children with Cleft

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

5
23
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
5
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Individuals with cleft had higher odds of receiving the lowest grade and/or reduced odds of receiving high grades among subjects analyzed, along with strong evidence of a lower grade point average in comparison with the population as a whole. This study is congruent with other studies that have identified greater prevalence of cognitive dysfunction and learning difficulties, lower school achievements, and greater use of special education services in individuals with cleft in comparison with individuals without cleft (Broder et al, 1998;Nopoulos et al, 2002;Richman et al, 2005;Eide et al, 2006;Yazdy et al, 2008). Furthermore, this study supports the need to consider cleft type in studies of cognitive and educational outcomes (Richman, 1980;Richman and Eliason, 1984;Richman et al, 1988;Broder et al, 1998), with individuals with CP having the most negative outcome, followed by individuals with CLP, and those with CL being the least affected in comparison with the control group.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Individuals with cleft had higher odds of receiving the lowest grade and/or reduced odds of receiving high grades among subjects analyzed, along with strong evidence of a lower grade point average in comparison with the population as a whole. This study is congruent with other studies that have identified greater prevalence of cognitive dysfunction and learning difficulties, lower school achievements, and greater use of special education services in individuals with cleft in comparison with individuals without cleft (Broder et al, 1998;Nopoulos et al, 2002;Richman et al, 2005;Eide et al, 2006;Yazdy et al, 2008). Furthermore, this study supports the need to consider cleft type in studies of cognitive and educational outcomes (Richman, 1980;Richman and Eliason, 1984;Richman et al, 1988;Broder et al, 1998), with individuals with CP having the most negative outcome, followed by individuals with CLP, and those with CL being the least affected in comparison with the control group.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Research has indicated that individuals with cleft can experience cognitive dysfunction, learning difficulties, and lower levels of school achievement (Richman and Eliason, 1982;Broder et al, 1998;Nopoulos et al, 2002;Richman et al, 2005;Eide et al, 2006). Research indicates that these deficiencies can be attributed to the type of cleft (Richman, 1980;Richman andEliason, 1982, 1984;Richman et al, 1988;Broder et al, 1998) or the severity of cleft (McWilliams et al, 1972;Fox et al, 1978;Nopoulos et al, 2002).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Children with iCL/P have frequently been shown to have slower rapid naming ability than their healthy peers (Conrad et al, 2009; Conrad et al, 2014; Richman & Ryan, 2003), and a study by Richman, Wilgenbusch, & Hall (2009) reported an association between inefficient verbal labeling and impaired reading skills. In light of the current study’s findings regarding rapid naming, it is likely that impaired automatic verbal labeling skills underlie deficits in both reading and mathematics.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The impact of delayed or deviant speech on phonological development in children with a cleft palate + lip has been highlighted (Chapman, 2011;Bessell et al, 2013;Willadsen, 2013). Moreover, the importance of language skills for the acquisition of early reading skills has been explored, as well as deficits in rapid naming and visual memory, a problem which is known to be a predictor of reading disabilities (Muter et al, 2004;Richman et al, 2005;Chapman, 2011;Conrad et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%