Combining Two Developmental Screening Tests to Improve Predictive Accuracy

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 413-420
Author(s):  
Bonnie W. Camp ◽  
Levi N. Bonnell
PEDIATRICS ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 89 (6) ◽  
pp. 1221-1225
Author(s):  
Frances Page Glascoe ◽  
Karen E. Byrne ◽  
Linda G. Ashford ◽  
Katherine L. Johnson ◽  
Bernard Chang ◽  
...  

One of the oldest and best known developmental screening tests was recently restandardized and revised as the Denver-II. Because it was published without evidence of its accuracy, the present study was undertaken with 104 children between 3 and 72 months of age attending one of five day-care centers. To determine the presence of developmental problems, children were administered individual measures of intelligence, speech-language, achievement, and adaptive behavior. A second psychological examiner, blind to the outcome of the diagnostic battery, administered the Denver-II. Developmental problems including language impairments, learning disabilities, mild mental retardation, and/or functional developmental delay were found in 17% of the children. The Denver-II identified correctly 83% and thus had high rates of sensitivity. However, more than half the children with normal development also received abnormal, questionable, or untestable Denver-II scores. Thus the test had limited specificity (43%) and a high overreferral rate. The alternative scoring method, categorizing questionable/untestable scores as normal, caused sensitivity to drop to 56% although specificity rose to 80%. Since neither scoring method produced acceptable levels of accuracy, an effort was made to locate the sources of accuracy and inaccuracy within the test. Only items in the language domain were modestly helpful in discriminating children with and without difficulties. The findings suggest that the authors of the Denver-II need to engage in further development of the instrument including revising scoring criteria and item placement in relation to children's ages. In the interim, test users should employ screening tests which are more accurate such as the Minnesota Inventories or the Battelle Developmental Inventory Screening Test.


1988 ◽  
Vol 113 (6) ◽  
pp. 1110-1113 ◽  
Author(s):  
William K. Frankenburg ◽  
Jianhua Chen ◽  
Susan M. Thornton

1993 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 368-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
FRANCES PAGE GLASCOE ◽  
KAREN E. BYRNE

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali M. El Shafie ◽  
Zein A.L. Omar ◽  
Mai M. Bashir ◽  
sorour fayez mahmoud ◽  
El-sayedamr M. Basma ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Detecting developmental delays in infants is an ongoing world commitment, especially for those below three years old. it provides appropriate services to them, early inspection enhances the communal quality of resolving difficult issues of this critical period of age. Thus, our main objective lies in developing a sufficient screening test for early evaluation of mental and motor development for infants.Methods: 54 items of motor and mental developmental milestones were adopted from the Baroda Screening Test. Then, researchers enrolled 1600 subjects based on certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. 97 pass level of developmental achievements resembles the threshold of which infants below which, infants are considered delayed.Results: The designed Egyptian Developmental Screening Tool (“EDST”) from birth up to 30 monthswith 50% and 97% pass level curves proves efficacy, reliability, cultural adaptability, and simplicity to use when compared with other peer screening tools. Results revealed a statistically significant difference between Egyptian and Baroda chart at 50% and 97% pass level. A z-score chart for motor and mental development follow up designed by calculating each age group.Conclusions: Developmental screening tests from birth up to 30 months proved consistent reliability and versatility to use in Egypt for early development delay detection. The wide variation of Egyptian infants 'developmental ages on both Egyptian and Baroda charts underpins the Egyptian chart to the Egyptian public. The z-score chart is a rapid and easy follow-up chart for Egyptian infants' development.


2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (10) ◽  
pp. S148-S149
Author(s):  
Sung Sil Rah ◽  
Minho Jung ◽  
Kyungmin Lee ◽  
Hannah Kang ◽  
Soyoung Jang ◽  
...  

1984 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 628-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark L. Bassett ◽  
June W. Halliday ◽  
Robyn A. Ferris ◽  
Lawrie W. Powell

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document