Patricia Eadie

Dr. Patricia Eadie

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

24Years (2003-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
18 November 2014 in Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PEPatricia Eadie
Patricia Eadie
Angela MorganAngela Morgan
Angela Morgan
OUObioha C Ukoumunne
Obioha C Ukoumunne
KEKyriaki Ttofari Eecen
Kyriaki Ttofari Eecen
MWMelissa Anne Wake
Melissa Anne Wake
SRSheena Reilly
Sheena Reilly
Aim: The epidemiology of preschool speech sound disorder is poorly understood. Our aims were to determine: the prevalence of idiopathic speech sound disorder; the comorbidity of speech sound disorder with language and pre‐literacy difficulties; and the factors contributing to speech outcome at 4 years.Method: One thousand four hundred and ninety‐four participants from an Australian longitudinal cohort completed speech, language, and pre‐literacy assessments at 4 years. Prevalence of speech sound disorder (SSD) was defined by standard score performance of ≤79 on a speech assessment. Logistic regression examined predictors of SSD within four domains: child and family; parent‐reported speech; cognitive‐linguistic; and parent‐reported motor skills.Results: At 4 years the prevalence of speech disorder in an Australian cohort was 3.4%. Comorbidity with SSD was 40.8% for language disorder and 20.8% for poor pre‐literacy skills. Sex, maternal vocabulary, socio‐economic status, and family history of speech and language difficulties predicted SSD, as did 2‐year speech, language, and motor skills. Together these variables provided good discrimination of SSD (area under the curve=0.78).Interpretation: This is the first epidemiological study to demonstrate prevalence of SSD at 4 years of age that was consistent with previous clinical studies. Early detection of SSD at 4 years should focus on family variables and speech, language, and motor skills measured at 2 years.

25 March 2018 in International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PEPatricia Eadie
Patricia Eadie
LCLaura Conway
Laura Conway
BHBirgit Hallenstein
Birgit Hallenstein
FMFiona Mensah
Fiona Mensah
CMCristina McKean
Cristina McKean
SRSheena Reilly
Sheena Reilly

6 June 2022 in Educational Review
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PEPatricia Eadie
Patricia Eadie
JPJane Page
Jane Page
Penny LevickisPenny Levickis
Penny Levickis
CECatriona Elek
Catriona Elek
LMLisa Murray
Lisa Murray
CLCatherine Lloyd-Johnsen
Catherine Lloyd-Johnsen
Early childhood education and care programmes provide opportunities to enhance children’s learning and development, especially when high-quality learning experiences and educator-child interactions are embedded within them. However, the quality of early childhood education programmes varies greatly. Quality in early childhood education and care is conceptualised in three domains: structural, process and system. Understanding how to drive quality improvements in early childhood education and care relies on clear, consistent evidence concerning each of these domains, however, the current literature is not comprehensive. This scoping review maps the extent and consistency of the research literature in each domain of quality to identify knowledge gaps and inform future research. Through a search of the peer-reviewed literature, 85 meta-analyses and systematic reviews meeting our inclusion criteria were identified. We found a wide variation in the number of included studies in each domain and sub-domain of quality. We found the greatest number of meta-analyses and systematic reviews related to programmes, interventions, and curricula (process quality) and professional development and support (structural quality). The literature included in this scoping review is heterogeneous and of varying methodological quality, with inconsistent or contradictory findings. The research is most consistent in relation to pedagogy, professional development and support, and programmes, interventions, and curricula (process quality) and learning environments (structural quality). Interactions between the different domains of quality are complex and future research should focus on the associations between different features of quality in early childhood education programmes and practices that are critical to implementing successful continuous improvement initiatives.

1 February 2023 in International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Penny LevickisPenny Levickis
Penny Levickis
PEPatricia Eadie
Patricia Eadie
FMFiona Mensah
Fiona Mensah
CMCristina McKean
Cristina McKean
EBEdith L. Bavin
Edith L. Bavin
SRSheena Reilly
Sheena Reilly
Background: A wealth of evidence supports the important role high‐quality parent–child interactions play in children's early language acquisition. However, the impact on later language outcomes remains unclear.Aims: To examine the associations between responsive parental behaviours across the early years and child language outcomes at age 7 years with families from an Australian longitudinal cohort study (N = 1148, 50% female).Methods & Procedures: At child ages 12, 24 and 36 months, parents completed a self‐report measure of responsive parental behaviours. Child language was directly assessed at age 7 using the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, 4th edition (CELF‐4), Australian Standardisation. Linear regression was used to examine associations between responsive parental behaviours from 12 to 36 months (consistently high, inconsistent and consistently low responsive parental behaviours at the three time points) and language scores at age 7 years. Adjusted models were run, including the following potential confounders: child sex; birth weight; birth order; maternal education; socio‐economic disadvantage; non‐English‐speaking background; family history of speech–language problems; mother's vocabulary score; maternal mental health score; and mother's age at birth of child. A final adjusted model was run, including the potential confounder variables as well as adjusting for children's earlier language skills.Outcomes & Results: Linear regression results showed children with parents who rated high on responsive parental behaviours at all three time points had higher mean language scores at age 7 than children whose parents reported low responsive parental behaviours across early childhood. This association attenuated after adjusting for earlier child language skills.Conclusions & Implications: Findings support the consistent use of responsive parental behaviours across the very early years of childhood to support long‐term language outcomes. Findings also suggest that models of surveillance and support which monitor and assist families at multiple time‐points over the early years are likely to be most effective for preventing ongoing language difficulties.WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: There is extensive evidence consistently demonstrating the important contribution of aspects of parent–child interaction, specifically responsive parental behaviours, to children's language development.What this paper adds to the existing knowledge: Understanding the cumulative benefit of responsive parent–child interactions across the very early years may help to inform preventive interventions and service delivery models for supporting young children's language development. This study demonstrates in a large, population‐based cohort the contribution of consistency of responsive parental behaviours during infancy and toddlerhood to school‐age language outcomes, accounting for other child, family and environmental factors. Capturing regular parent behaviours via self‐report during the early years may be a more efficient and less costly method than parent–child interaction observations to monitor the home language‐learning environment during routine developmental checks.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Findings support the need for surveillance of children and families in the early years, ensuring that intervention occurs when families need it most, that is, support is responsive to changing needs and that nuanced advice and support strategies are provided to activate positive developmental cascades. Capturing both parent behaviours and child language may assist clinicians to identify those families who may benefit from parent–child interaction intervention.

23 January 2019 in Early Childhood Education Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PEPatricia Eadie
Patricia Eadie
HSHannah Stark
Hannah Stark
FNFrank Niklas
Frank Niklas

1 February 2021 in Pediatrics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PEPatricia Eadie
Patricia Eadie
EBEdith L. Bavin
Edith L. Bavin
LBLesley Bretherton
Lesley Bretherton
FCFallon Cook
Fallon Cook
LGLisa Gold
Lisa Gold
SRSheena Reilly
Sheena Reilly
OBJECTIVES: To examine the contribution of early life factors and preschool- and school-aged language abilities to children’s 11-year language and academic outcomes. METHODS: Participants (N = 839) were from a prospective community cohort study of 1910 infants recruited at 8 to 10 months of age. Early life factors included a combination of child (prematurity, birth weight), family (socioeconomic disadvantage, family history of language difficulties), and maternal factors (education, vocabulary, and age). Language (standardized assessment of receptive and expressive skills) and academic (national assessment) outcomes at 11 years were predicted by using a series of multivariable regression models. RESULTS: Early life factors explained 11% to 12% of variance in language scores at 11 years. The variance explained increased to 47% to 64% when language scores from 2 to 7 years were included. The largest increase in variance explained was with 4-year language scores. The same early life factors explained 13% to 14% of academic scores at 11 years, with increases to 43% to 54% when language scores from 2 to 11 years were included. Early life factors adequately discriminated between children with typical and low language scores but were much better discriminators of children with typical and low academic scores. When earlier language scores were added to models then the area under the curve increased to 0.9 and above. CONCLUSIONS: Children’s language outcomes at 11 years are accurately predicted by their 4-year language ability and their academic outcomes at 11 years are predicted by early family and home environment factors. Children with low language abilities at 11 years consistently performed more poorly on national assessments of literacy and numeracy.