Literature DB >> 24294061

Investigation of test characteristics of two screening tools in comparison with a gold standard assessment to detect developmental delay at 36 months: A pilot study.

Lisa Currie1, Linda Dodds, Sarah Shea, Gordon Flowerdew, Jennifer McLean, Robin Walker, Michael Vincer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ability of the Rourke Baby Record (Rourke) and the Nipissing District Developmental Screen (NDDS) to detect developmental delay is not known.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the test characteristics of the Rourke and NDDS compared with the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development III for detecting developmental delay in high-risk children.
METHODS: Three-year-olds were recruited from the IWK Health Centre (Halifax, Nova Scotia). Two cut-points were evaluated (one and two or more areas of concern) from the Rourke and NDDS, and were compared with a score of ≤85 on the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development III.
RESULTS: The majority (67.7%) of the 31 participants reported no concern. At one area of concern, sensitivity was 75% for both the Rourke and NDDS. When two areas of concern were noted, specificity was 93% for the Rourke and 96% for NDDS.
CONCLUSIONS: Both the Rourke and the NDDS appear to be reasonably sensitive and specific, but further investigation is warranted.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Developmental delay; Developmental screening; Developmental surveillance

Year:  2012        PMID: 24294061      PMCID: PMC3549691          DOI: 10.1093/pch/17.10.549

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Child Health        ISSN: 1205-7088            Impact factor:   2.253


  8 in total

1.  Identifying infants and young children with developmental disorders in the medical home: an algorithm for developmental surveillance and screening.

Authors: 
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 7.124

2.  Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.

Authors:  R Jaeschke; G H Guyatt; D L Sackett
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-03-02       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Outcome of very preterm birth: children reviewed with ease at 2 years differ from those followed up with difficulty.

Authors:  W Tin; S Fritz; U Wariyar; E Hey
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 5.747

4.  Underestimation of developmental delay by the new Bayley-III Scale.

Authors:  Peter J Anderson; Cinzia R De Luca; Esther Hutchinson; Gehan Roberts; Lex W Doyle
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2010-04

5.  The Child Development Inventory: A developmental outcome measure for follow-up of the high-risk infant.

Authors:  K B Doig; M M Macias; C F Saylor; J R Craver; P E Ingram
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.406

6.  Effects of early intervention and stimulation on the preterm infant.

Authors:  S A Leib; D G Benfield; J Guidubaldi
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1980-07       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Getting it right at 18 months: In support of an enhanced well-baby visit.

Authors:  Robin Williams; Jean Clinton
Journal:  Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.253

8.  The Rourke Baby Record Infant/Child Maintenance Guide: do doctors use it, do they find it useful, and does using it improve their well-baby visit records?

Authors:  Leslie Rourke; Marshall Godwin; James Rourke; Sarah Pearce; Joyce Bean
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2009-04-30       Impact factor: 2.497

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  Evaluation of the revised Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children.

Authors:  John Cairney; Jean Clinton; Scott Veldhuizen; Christine Rodriguez; Cheryl Missiuna; Terrance Wade; Peter Szatmari; Marilyn Kertoy
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 2.125

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.