The Fluharty Preschool Speech and Language Screening Test A Population-Based Validation Study Using Sample-Independent Decision Rules Research Article
Research Article  |   August 01, 1993
The Fluharty Preschool Speech and Language Screening Test
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Raymond A. Sturner
    Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC
  • James H. Heller
    Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC
  • Sandra G. Funk
    University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • Thomas L. Layton
    University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • Contact author: Raymond Sturner, MD, Child Development Unit, Department of Pediatrics, Box 3364, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710.
Article Information
Special Populations / Early Identification & Intervention / School-Based Settings / Research Issues, Methods & Evidence-Based Practice / Language Disorders / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Language / Research Articles
Research Article   |   August 01, 1993
The Fluharty Preschool Speech and Language Screening Test
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, August 1993, Vol. 36, 738-745. doi:10.1044/jshr.3604.738
History: Received January 9, 1992 , Accepted January 20, 1993
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, August 1993, Vol. 36, 738-745. doi:10.1044/jshr.3604.738
History: Received January 9, 1992; Accepted January 20, 1993

Two cohorts of 4- and 5-year-old children (N = 700) were screened with the Fluharty Preschool Speech and Language Screening Test. Two stratified samples (n = 51 cohort 1; n = 147 cohort 2), based on speech-language screening results, were administered criterion tests for articulation (AAPS-R or Templin-Darley) and language (TOLD or TALC-R). Clinical validation indices for combined speech or language outcome in the two cohorts were as follows: sensitivity, .43 and .31 respectively; specificity, .82 and .93; predictive value, .43 and .54; overreferral, 14% and 5%; underreferral, 14% in both cohorts, and percent agreement, 72% and 80%. The measure of sensitivities for language outcomes was lower than the above, whereas sensitivities for articulation was higher. These results suggest that the Fluharty is too insensitive to be relied on for screening programs aimed at identifying preschool children with language disorders, although it appears to have promise for the identification of children with articulation impairments.

Acknowledgments
This study was supported by grant MCJ-370574 from the Maternal and Child Health Bureau (Title V, Social Security Act), Health Resources and Services Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, and the Kate B. Reynolds Foundation. The Harnett County Board of Education was very cooperative, and Connie Wood was instrumental in coordination of school facilities and personnel assistance. Pamela Burnett Collins helped organize and carry out needed technical assistance. Barbara Howard and Elizabeth Tornquist are acknowledged for assistance with critical manuscript review, and Alfreida Stevens and Denise Kearney are acknowledged for their secretarial assistance.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access