Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine prevalence and predictors of persistent speech sound disorder (SSD) in children aged 8 years after disregarding children presenting solely with common clinical distortions (i.e., residual errors). Method Data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (Boyd et al., 2012) were used. Children were classified as having persistent SSD on the basis of percentage of consonants correct measures from connected speech samples. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors. Results The estimated prevalence of persistent SSD was 3.6%. Children with persistent SSD were more likely to be boys and from families who were not homeowners. Early childhood predictors identified as important were weak sucking at 4 weeks, not often combining words at 24 months, limited use of word morphology at 38 months, and being unintelligible to strangers at age 38 months. School-age predictors identified as important were maternal report of difficulty pronouncing certain sounds and hearing impairment at age 7 years, tympanostomy tube insertion at any age up to 8 years, and a history of suspected coordination problems. The contribution of these findings to our understanding of risk factors for persistent SSD and the nature of the condition is considered. Conclusion Variables identified as predictive of persistent SSD suggest that factors across motor, cognitive, and linguistic processes may place a child at risk.

Objectives: A systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association between active maternal smoking and cleft lip and palate etiology. Data sources: Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to November, 2020. Study selection: Observational studies of cigarette smoking habits in pregnant women. Outcomes included cleft lip and/or palate, cleft lip ± palate and cleft palate only. Data analysis: Publication bias analyses were performed and the Newcastle Ottawa scales were used to assess study quality. Fixed or random effect models were used in the meta-analysis, dependent on risk of statistical heterogeneity. Results: Forty-five studies were eligible for inclusion of which 11 were cohort and 34 were case–control studies. Sixteen studies were of sufficient standard for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The summary odds ratio for the association between smoking and cleft lip and/or palate was 1.42 (95%CI 1.27-1.59) with a population attributable fraction of 4% (95%CI 3%-5%). There was limited evidence to show a dose–response effect of smoking. Conclusions: This review reports a moderate association between maternal smoking and orofacial cleft but the overall quality of the conventional observational studies included was poor. There is a need for high quality and novel research strategies to further define the role of smoking in the etiology of cleft lip and palate.

Background: Children with persistent speech disorder (PSD) are at higher risk of difficulties with literacy, with some evidence suggesting an association with poorer educational attainment. However, studies to date have either used small clinical samples, which exclude children who have not been referred to clinical services, or relied on parent–teacher report of children's speech development. There is a need for an inclusive study to investigate the impact of PSD on educational outcomes using a population‐based sample and robust measures of speech development.Aim: Using a large prospective UK population‐based study—the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC)—this study investigated: (1) how children identified with PSD at age 8 years perform on educational attainment tests at ages 10–11 and 13–14 years in comparison with children without PSD; and (2) whether children identified with PSD at age 8 years are more likely to receive a label of special educational needs (SEN) in secondary school.Methods & Procedures: We examined the data for 263 children with PSD and 6399 controls who had speech assessed at age 8 years in a research clinic. Educational attainment was measured using data from English school standard attainment tests. Data on SEN categorization were obtained between 11 and 13 years of age. Children with PSD and controls were compared using regression analyses adjusted for biological sex, maternal age, verbal, performance and full‐scale IQ.Outcomes & Results: Children with PSD at age 8 years were more likely to achieve lower attainment scores at ages 10–11 years in English and mathematics and across all three subjects of English, mathematics and science at ages 13–14 years after controlling for biological sex and maternal education; score below target levels for English at both time points after controlling for verbal IQ, and at ages 13–14 years after controlling for performance IQ; and receive a label of SEN (typically for the category of cognition and learning needs or communication and interaction needs) in secondary school.Conclusions & Implications: PSD identified at age 8 years is associated with poor educational attainment at ages 10–11 and 13–14 years in the core subjects of English, mathematics and science. Children with PSD at age 8 years are more likely to be identified with SEN at ages 11–13 years, particularly cognition and learning needs, and communication and interaction needs. We need to be aware of the potential for the long‐term impact of PSD on educational attainment in providing appropriate and effective support throughout school. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Speech‐sound disorder is associated with reading and spelling difficulties, with some evidence to suggest that PSD is associated with a higher risk of literacy difficulties. Limited evidence also suggests that speech‐sound disorder may be associated with poorer educational attainment. However, studies to date have used small clinical samples or parent–teacher report of speech development and there is a need to determine whether the association is observed in larger and more inclusive population‐based samples. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This prospective, longitudinal study of a large community‐based sample of English children has shown that PSD is associated with poorer educational attainment at the end of primary school and at ages 13–14 years. Children with PSD are also more likely to be identified as having SEN in secondary school, especially communication and interaction needs but also including cognition and learning needs. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Understanding the long‐term implications of PSD on educational attainment highlights the importance of ongoing monitoring and support to enable children to reach their potential throughout primary and secondary school. The identification of children with a history of PSD during transition to secondary school will enable effective support to be put in place. The intervention for children with PSD should involve close collaboration between speech and language therapists and education professionals.

Purpose: Social, emotional and behavioural difficulties (SEBD) in childhood are associated with negative consequences across the life course. Children with developmental language disorder have been identified as being at risk of developing SEBD but it is unclear whether a similar risk exists for children with speech sound disorder, a condition which impacts on children's ability to make themselves understood and has been shown to be associated with poor educational outcomes.Methods: Participants were children who attended the 8‐year‐old clinic in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (N = 7390). Children with speech sound disorder that had persisted beyond the period of typical speech acquisition (persistent speech disorder [PSD]) at age 8 were identified from recordings and transcriptions of speech samples (N = 263). Parent‐, teacher‐ and child‐reported questionnaires and interviews including the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, Short Moods and Feelings Questionnaire and measures for antisocial and risk‐taking behaviour were used to provide outcome scores for SEBD at 10–14 years in a series of regression analyses.Results: Following adjustment for biological sex, socio‐economic status and Intelligence Quotient, children with PSD at age 8 were more likely to show peer problems at age 10–11 years compared with their peers, as reported by teachers and parents. Teachers were more likely to report problems with emotionality. Children with PSD were no more likely to report symptoms of depression than their peers. No associations were observed between PSD, risk of antisocial behaviour, trying alcohol at age 10 or smoking cigarettes at age 14.Conclusions: Children with PSD may be at risk in terms of their peer relationships. This could impact on their wellbeing and, while not observed at this age, may lead to depressive symptoms in older childhood and adolescence. There is also the potential that these symptoms may impact on educational outcomes.

Background: The publication of phase 2 of the CATALISE project in 2017 clarified terminology for children with developmental language disorder (DLD) or delay but unintentionally muddied the water for children with unintelligible speech. A diagnostic label of DLD (phonology) indicates poor prognosis and phonological disorder that persists into middle childhood. However, in contrast to other diagnostic labels that fall under the overarching term of speech sound disorder (SSD), DLD (phonology) does not elucidate the characteristics of the child's speech nor does it point us in the direction of appropriate intervention.Aims: The aim of this paper is to discuss terminology in SSD leading to an evidence‐based model which builds on the model of DLD developed in CATALISE, supports descriptive diagnosis and signposts intervention.Methods: Following a focused review of literature proposing or describing terminology for SSD, an expert group of researchers in developmental SSD proposed a revised model of existing terminology. Groups of UK speech and language therapists (SLTs) who provide services for children with SSD were asked to comment on its acceptability and feasibility.Discussion: A three‐level terminology model was developed. This comprised an overarching Level 1 term; Level 2 terms that differentiated SSD of unknown origin from SSD with associated or underlying conditions; and specific diagnostic terms at Level 3 to support further assessment and intervention decisions. Consulted SLTs generally expressed agreement with the proposed terminology and a willingness to adopt it in practice.Conclusions: Existing terminology for childhood SSD provides a good basis for clinical decision‐making. A modified version of Dodd's (2005) terminology was found to be acceptable to UK SLTs. There is an evident overlap of SSD with CATALISE terminology. However more detailed and specialist terminology than ‘DLD (phonology)’ is required to support clinical decision‐making. It is proposed that endorsement by the UK Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists would obviate the need for a Delphi process.What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: Over nearly a hundred years, as our knowledge and understanding of speech sound disorder (SSD) has increased, so has the terminology that is used to describe those disorders. Current terminology not only describes subtypes of SSD but can also signpost us to effective interventions. With the publication, in 2017, of phase 2 of CATALISE a new term of ‘developmental language disorder (DLD) (phonology)’ was introduced with the unintentional consequence of challenging more specific descriptive terms for SSD. What this paper adds: In the context of CATALISE and DLD (phonology), the history and nature of SSD terminology are reappraised. Building on the model of DLD developed in CATALISE, a tiered model that supports descriptive diagnosis and signposts intervention is proposed for discussion. Clinical implications of this study: The proposed model of terminology for SSD provides descriptive and detailed labels that will support accuracy in differential diagnosis of developmental SSD by speech and language therapists. Furthermore, a decision‐making tree for SSD demonstrates the pathway from diagnostic use of the terminology to the selection of evidence‐based, effective interventions.