K B Doig1, M M Macias, C F Saylor, J R Craver, P E Ingram. 1. Division of Genetics and Child Development, Department of Pediatrics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston 29425, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity of the Child Development Inventory (CDI) compared with other commonly used measures of developmental outcomes in high-risk infants. STUDY DESIGN: Primary caregivers of 63 toddlers and preschoolers enrolled at a routine neonatal high-risk follow-up clinic completed a CDI describing their children. Only those with successfully completed CDIs were included in the analysis (n = 43). The CDI General Development Developmental Quotient was compared with the Clinical Adaptive Test/Clinical Linguistic and Auditory Milestone Scale (CAT/CLAMS) and the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, 2nd Edition (BSID-II). RESULTS: Significant correlations were found between the CDI, the CAT/CLAMS (r =.87, P <.001), and the BSID-II (r =.86, P <.001). There were no significant correlations between the CDI and parent education and income. Findings revealed high sensitivity (80% to 100%) and specificity (94% to 96%) for the CDI. CONCLUSION: The CDI appears to be a useful and cost-effective screening measure for determining developmental outcomes among high-risk infants.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity of the Child Development Inventory (CDI) compared with other commonly used measures of developmental outcomes in high-risk infants. STUDY DESIGN: Primary caregivers of 63 toddlers and preschoolers enrolled at a routine neonatal high-risk follow-up clinic completed a CDI describing their children. Only those with successfully completed CDIs were included in the analysis (n = 43). The CDI General Development Developmental Quotient was compared with the Clinical Adaptive Test/Clinical Linguistic and Auditory Milestone Scale (CAT/CLAMS) and the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, 2nd Edition (BSID-II). RESULTS: Significant correlations were found between the CDI, the CAT/CLAMS (r =.87, P <.001), and the BSID-II (r =.86, P <.001). There were no significant correlations between the CDI and parent education and income. Findings revealed high sensitivity (80% to 100%) and specificity (94% to 96%) for the CDI. CONCLUSION: The CDI appears to be a useful and cost-effective screening measure for determining developmental outcomes among high-risk infants.
Authors: C Brei; L Stecher; S Brunner; R Ensenauer; F Heinen; P D Wagner; J Hermsdörfer; H Hauner Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2017-05-24 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Lisa Currie; Linda Dodds; Sarah Shea; Gordon Flowerdew; Jennifer McLean; Robin Walker; Michael Vincer Journal: Paediatr Child Health Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 2.253
Authors: Thea S Skogheim; Gro D Villanger; Kjell Vegard F Weyde; Stephanie M Engel; Pål Surén; Merete G Øie; Annette H Skogan; Guido Biele; Pål Zeiner; Kristin R Øvergaard; Line S Haug; Azemira Sabaredzovic; Heidi Aase Journal: Int J Hyg Environ Health Date: 2019-10-22 Impact factor: 5.840
Authors: A Salt; K Freeman; A Prusa; N Ferret; W Buffolano; G Malm; D Schmidt; H K Tan; R E Gilbert; E Petersen Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2005-07-05 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: M J Korndewal; A C T M Vossen; J Cremer; R S VAN Binnendijk; A C M Kroes; M A B VAN DER Sande; A M Oudesluys-Murphy; H E DE Melker Journal: Epidemiol Infect Date: 2015-11-11 Impact factor: 4.434