PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Kim L Tillery

Publications and source records attributed to Kim L Tillery.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Auditory processing disorder in children diagnosed with nonverbal learning disability.

PURPOSE: To determine whether children with a nonverbal learning disability (NVLD) have a higher incidence of auditory processing disorder (APD), especially in the tolerance-fading memory type of APD, and what associations could be found between performance on neuropsychological, intellectual, memory, and academic measures and APD. METHOD: Eighteen children with NVLD ranging in age from 6 to 18 years received a central auditory processing test battery to determine incidence and subtype of APD. Psychological measures for assessment of NVLD included the Wechsler Scales, Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning, and Wechsler Individual Achievement Test. Neuropsychological measures included the Category Test, Trails A and B, the Tactual Performance Test, Grooved Pegs, and the Speech Sounds Perception Test. Neuropsychological test scores of the NVLD+APD and NVLD groups were compared using analysis of covariance procedures, with Verbal IQ and Performance IQ as covariates. RESULTS: Sixty-one percent of the children were diagnosed with APD, primarily in the tolerance-fading memory subtype. The group of children with APD and NVLD had significantly lower scores on Verbal IQ, Digit Span, Sentence Memory, Block Design, and Speech Sounds Perception than children without APD. An ancillary finding was that the incidence of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder was significantly higher in children with NVLD (with and without APD) than in the general population. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that children with NVLD are at risk for APD and that there are several indicators on neuropsychological assessment suggestive of APD. Collaborative, interdisciplinary evaluation of children with learning disorders is needed in order to provide effective therapeutic interventions.

Adolescent↗

Can central auditory processing tests resist supramodal influences?

For the past 10 years, Cacace and McFarland have contended that current central auditory processing tests are invalid because they cannot disassociate central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) from language, attention, and other problems. Over this period of time, they have not developed a battery of tests to compare with the current procedures, so the question cannot be resolved in a proper scientific fashion. Also, we disagree with their contention and demonstrate that an experienced audiologist, under double-blind research conditions, can reliably evaluate individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder for CAPD, whether therapeutically controlled for attention with Ritalin or taking a placebo. Further, we show how intra- and intertest comparisons, as well as a team approach, disassociate CAPD from potential contamination from supramodal factors.

Adult↗