Can the Children's Communication Checklist differentiate between children with autism, children with ADHD, and normal controls?

• Published in: Journal of child psychology and psychiatry 2004-11, Vol.45 (8), p.1437-1453
• Main Authors: Geurts, Hilde M., Verté, Sylvie, Oosterlaan, Jaap, Roeyers, Herbert, Hartman, Catharina A., Mulder, Erik J., van Berckelaer-Onnes, Ina A., Sergeant, Joseph A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: ADHD; Adolescent; Age Differences; Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders - diagnosis; Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders - epidemiology; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity - epidemiology; Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; Autism; Autistic Disorder - epidemiology; Biological and medical sciences; CCC; Check Lists; Child; Children; Communication Disorders - diagnosis; Communication Disorders - epidemiology; Communication Skills; Comparative Analysis; Disability Identification; Female; Humans; Language Skills; Male; Medical sciences; Parents; Pragmatics; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychometrics. Diagnostic aid systems; Psychopathology. Psychiatry; Questionnaires; Semiotics; Severity of Illness Index; Surveys and Questionnaires; Teachers; Techniques and methods
• ISSN: 0021-9630; 1469-7610
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00326.x

Background:  The Children's Communication Checklist (CCC; Bishop, 1998) is a questionnaire that was developed to measure pragmatic language use and may be completed by parents and teachers. Two studies are reported, which were designed to investigate: (1) whether children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) encounter pragmatic language problems in comparison with normal controls (NC), (2) whether children with ADHD and children with High Functioning Autism (HFA) can be differentiated using the CCC, (3) the usefulness of the CCC for parents and teachers in a clinical and in a research setting, and (4) the role of age in pragmatic language use in ADHD and HFA. Method:  In the first study (clinical sample) 50 children with ADHD, 50 children with HFA, and 50 NC were compared to each other using the CCC. In the second study (research sample) CCC data was gathered on 23 children with ADHD (without co‐morbid disorders), 42 children with HFA, and 35 NC. Results:  Compared to NC, children with HFA showed pragmatic deficits on all CCC scales. Children with ADHD demonstrated deficits compared to NC as well. Moreover, the ADHD and HFA groups differed from each other on most of the scales. Discriminant analyses showed that CCC scales were relevant for case identification in these samples. Furthermore, profiles of impairment seen in children with HFA and ADHD did not vary with age. Conclusion:  Pragmatic difficulties do occur in both HFA and ADHD. The present studies indicate that the CCC is a useful instrument to obtain information concerning pragmatic language use in both a clinical and a research setting. Although the information of parents is more tightly linked to the diagnosis, combining the information of both parent and teacher slightly improves case identification.