The Recent GSK J4 Is Double The Enjoyable

Table ?Table11 also shows that IQ varied greatly within the SLI group, and that even some participants with very low IQ had preserved reading skills (3 children). Therefore, from this sample of 45 SLI children, we created two sub-groups with intact IQ. Following Fraser et al. (2010), children with SLI were regarded as having non-verbal IQ within the normal range if they scored 80 or above on at least one of the two non-verbal measures (WISC, Ravens). One Selleck GSK-J4 sub-group comprised a sample of children with pure SLI and no IQ or reading difficulties (N = 16), hereafter the ��Pure SLI�� group. The second sub-group (N = 15) comprised a separate sample of SLI children with preserved IQ but reading difficulties, defined as having a SS as well as for these two sub-groups (Pure SLI, SLI PPR). Fifty CA-matched control children from the same schools as the SLI children also participated in the study. These comprised children who returned consent forms and who were close to individual SLI participants in age. The control group included 21 males and 29 females, with a mean age of 9 years, 4 months. By selecting control children with non-verbal IQ and reading in the normal range, we created a matched sample of typically-developing children for the Pure SLI group (N = 16) and for the SLI PPR group (N = 15). Group matching for the standardized ability tasks is shown in Table ?Table22 for these two SLI sub-groupings. Table ?Table22 also includes performance on the experimental tests of phonology that were used (see below). Table 2 Participant characteristics by matched sub-group. Standardized tests All tests described here were administered in Year 1 of the study except for the reading and spelling tests. Language abilities were measured through the use of two receptive subtests (Concepts and Directions, and Semantic Relations or Sentence Structure, depending on the child's age) and two expressive subtests (Formulating Sentences, and Sentence Assembly or Word Structure, depending on the child's age) of the CELF-3 (Semel et al., 1995; in some tasks the CELF has different versions for children aged 6�C9 years, and for children older than 9 years).