Cargando…

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

BACKGROUND: There is widespread interest in identification of developmental delay in the first six years of life. This requires, however, a reliable and valid measure for screening. In Ontario, the 18-month enhanced well-baby visit includes province-wide administration of a parent-reported survey, t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cairney, John, Clinton, Jean, Veldhuizen, Scott, Rodriguez, Christine, Missiuna, Cheryl, Wade, Terrance, Szatmari, Peter, Kertoy, Marilyn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4794856/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26983782
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-016-0577-y
_version_ 1782421535742492672
author Cairney, John
Clinton, Jean
Veldhuizen, Scott
Rodriguez, Christine
Missiuna, Cheryl
Wade, Terrance
Szatmari, Peter
Kertoy, Marilyn
author_facet Cairney, John
Clinton, Jean
Veldhuizen, Scott
Rodriguez, Christine
Missiuna, Cheryl
Wade, Terrance
Szatmari, Peter
Kertoy, Marilyn
author_sort Cairney, John
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is widespread interest in identification of developmental delay in the first six years of life. This requires, however, a reliable and valid measure for screening. In Ontario, the 18-month enhanced well-baby visit includes province-wide administration of a parent-reported survey, the Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool, to facilitate early identification of delay. Yet, at present the psychometric properties of the NDDS are largely unknown. METHOD: 812 children and their families were recruited from the community. Parents (most often mothers) completed the NDDS. A sub-sample (n = 111) of parents completed the NDDS again within a two-week period to assess test-retest reliability. For children 3 or younger, the criterion measure was the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, 3rd edition; for older children, a battery of other measures was used. All criterion measures were administered by trained assessors. Mild and severe delays were identified based on both published cut-points and on the distribution of raw scores. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated to assess agreement between tests. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability was modest (Spearman’s rho = .62, p < 001). Regardless of the age of the child, the definition of delay (mild versus severe), or the cut-point used on the NDDS, sensitivities (from 29 to 68 %) and specificities (from 58 to 88 %) were poor to moderate. CONCLUSION: The modest test-retest results, coupled with the generally poor observed agreement with criterion measures, suggests the NDDS should not be used on its own for identification of developmental delay in community or population-based settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4794856
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47948562016-03-17 Evaluation of the revised Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children Cairney, John Clinton, Jean Veldhuizen, Scott Rodriguez, Christine Missiuna, Cheryl Wade, Terrance Szatmari, Peter Kertoy, Marilyn BMC Pediatr Research Article BACKGROUND: There is widespread interest in identification of developmental delay in the first six years of life. This requires, however, a reliable and valid measure for screening. In Ontario, the 18-month enhanced well-baby visit includes province-wide administration of a parent-reported survey, the Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool, to facilitate early identification of delay. Yet, at present the psychometric properties of the NDDS are largely unknown. METHOD: 812 children and their families were recruited from the community. Parents (most often mothers) completed the NDDS. A sub-sample (n = 111) of parents completed the NDDS again within a two-week period to assess test-retest reliability. For children 3 or younger, the criterion measure was the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, 3rd edition; for older children, a battery of other measures was used. All criterion measures were administered by trained assessors. Mild and severe delays were identified based on both published cut-points and on the distribution of raw scores. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated to assess agreement between tests. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability was modest (Spearman’s rho = .62, p < 001). Regardless of the age of the child, the definition of delay (mild versus severe), or the cut-point used on the NDDS, sensitivities (from 29 to 68 %) and specificities (from 58 to 88 %) were poor to moderate. CONCLUSION: The modest test-retest results, coupled with the generally poor observed agreement with criterion measures, suggests the NDDS should not be used on its own for identification of developmental delay in community or population-based settings. BioMed Central 2016-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4794856/ /pubmed/26983782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-016-0577-y Text en © Cairney et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cairney, John
Clinton, Jean
Veldhuizen, Scott
Rodriguez, Christine
Missiuna, Cheryl
Wade, Terrance
Szatmari, Peter
Kertoy, Marilyn
Evaluation of the revised Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children
title Evaluation of the revised Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children
title_full Evaluation of the revised Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children
title_fullStr Evaluation of the revised Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the revised Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children
title_short Evaluation of the revised Nipissing District Developmental Screening (NDDS) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children
title_sort evaluation of the revised nipissing district developmental screening (ndds) tool for use in general population samples of infants and children
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4794856/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26983782
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12887-016-0577-y
work_keys_str_mv AT cairneyjohn evaluationoftherevisednipissingdistrictdevelopmentalscreeningnddstoolforuseingeneralpopulationsamplesofinfantsandchildren
AT clintonjean evaluationoftherevisednipissingdistrictdevelopmentalscreeningnddstoolforuseingeneralpopulationsamplesofinfantsandchildren
AT veldhuizenscott evaluationoftherevisednipissingdistrictdevelopmentalscreeningnddstoolforuseingeneralpopulationsamplesofinfantsandchildren
AT rodriguezchristine evaluationoftherevisednipissingdistrictdevelopmentalscreeningnddstoolforuseingeneralpopulationsamplesofinfantsandchildren
AT missiunacheryl evaluationoftherevisednipissingdistrictdevelopmentalscreeningnddstoolforuseingeneralpopulationsamplesofinfantsandchildren
AT wadeterrance evaluationoftherevisednipissingdistrictdevelopmentalscreeningnddstoolforuseingeneralpopulationsamplesofinfantsandchildren
AT szatmaripeter evaluationoftherevisednipissingdistrictdevelopmentalscreeningnddstoolforuseingeneralpopulationsamplesofinfantsandchildren
AT kertoymarilyn evaluationoftherevisednipissingdistrictdevelopmentalscreeningnddstoolforuseingeneralpopulationsamplesofinfantsandchildren