Does the Inclusion of a Genome-Wide Polygenic Score Improve Early Risk Prediction for Later Language and Literacy Delay?

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Does the Inclusion of a Genome-Wide Polygenic Score Improve Early Risk Prediction for Later Language and Literacy Delay?
Authors:	Dale, Philip S.¹ dalep@unm.edu, von Stumm, Sophie², Selzam, Saskia³, Hayiou-Thomas, Marianna E.⁴
Source:	Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research. May2020, Vol. 63 Issue 5, p1467-1478. 12p. 4 Charts, 3 Graphs.
Subject Terms:	Delayed speech, Academic achievement, Vocabulary, Educational attainment, Language disorder diagnosis, Diagnosis of child development deviations, Risk assessment, Disease risk factors
Abstract:	Purpose: The ability to identify children early in development who are at substantial risk for language/literacy difficulties would have great benefit both for the children and for the educational and therapeutic institutions that serve them. Information that is relatively easily available prior to the age of 3 years, such as late talking, family history of language/literacy difficulties, and socioeconomic status, have some but very limited predictive power. Here, we examine whether the inclusion of a DNA-based genome-wide polygenic score that has been shown to capture children's genetic propensity for educational attainment (EA3) adds enough prediction to yield a clinically useful score. Method: Data are longitudinal scores of 1,420 children from the Twins Early Development Study, who were assessed at ages 2 and 3 years on language and nonverbal ability and at 12 years of age on oral language, word decoding, and reading comprehension. Five risk factors were examined: expressive vocabulary, nonverbal ability (these two from parent report), family history, mothers' education, and EA3. Analyses were conducted both for continuous and categorically defined measures of risk and outcome. Results: Language and literacy abilities at 12 years of age were significantly but modestly predicted by the risk factors, with a small but significant added prediction from EA3. Indices of diagnostic validity for poor outcomes, such as sensitivity and area under the curve statistics, were poor in all cases. Conclusions: We conclude that, at present, clinically useful prediction from toddlerhood remains an unattained goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research is the property of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	Purpose: The ability to identify children early in development who are at substantial risk for language/literacy difficulties would have great benefit both for the children and for the educational and therapeutic institutions that serve them. Information that is relatively easily available prior to the age of 3 years, such as late talking, family history of language/literacy difficulties, and socioeconomic status, have some but very limited predictive power. Here, we examine whether the inclusion of a DNA-based genome-wide polygenic score that has been shown to capture children's genetic propensity for educational attainment (EA3) adds enough prediction to yield a clinically useful score. Method: Data are longitudinal scores of 1,420 children from the Twins Early Development Study, who were assessed at ages 2 and 3 years on language and nonverbal ability and at 12 years of age on oral language, word decoding, and reading comprehension. Five risk factors were examined: expressive vocabulary, nonverbal ability (these two from parent report), family history, mothers' education, and EA3. Analyses were conducted both for continuous and categorically defined measures of risk and outcome. Results: Language and literacy abilities at 12 years of age were significantly but modestly predicted by the risk factors, with a small but significant added prediction from EA3. Indices of diagnostic validity for poor outcomes, such as sensitivity and area under the curve statistics, were poor in all cases. Conclusions: We conclude that, at present, clinically useful prediction from toddlerhood remains an unattained goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	10924388
DOI:	10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00161