Cargando…

The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems

AIM: A little is known about predictive validity of and professionals' adherence to language screening protocols. This study assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children and the effects of protocol deviations by prof...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Visser‐Bochane, Margot, Luinge, Margreet, Dieleman, Liesbeth, van der Schans, Cees, Reijneveld, Sijmen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7891318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32585043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apa.15447
_version_ 1783652672315850752
author Visser‐Bochane, Margot
Luinge, Margreet
Dieleman, Liesbeth
van der Schans, Cees
Reijneveld, Sijmen
author_facet Visser‐Bochane, Margot
Luinge, Margreet
Dieleman, Liesbeth
van der Schans, Cees
Reijneveld, Sijmen
author_sort Visser‐Bochane, Margot
collection PubMed
description AIM: A little is known about predictive validity of and professionals' adherence to language screening protocols. This study assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children and the effects of protocol deviations by professionals. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 124 children recruited and tested between October 2013 and December 2015. Children were recruited from four well child clinics in urban and rural areas. To validate the screening, we assessed children's language ability with standardised language tests following the 2‐year screening and 1 year later. We assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the screening and of protocol deviations. RESULTS: At 2 years, the sensitivity and specificity of the language screening were 0.79 and 0.86, and at 3 years 0.82 and 0.74, respectively. Protocol deviations by professionals were rare (7%) and did not significantly affect the validity of the screening. CONCLUSION: The language screening protocol was valid for detecting current and later language problems. Deviations from the protocol by professionals were rare and did not affect the concurrent nor predictive validity of the protocol. The 2‐year language screening supports professionals working in preventive child health care and deserves wider implementation in well child care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7891318
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78913182021-03-02 The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems Visser‐Bochane, Margot Luinge, Margreet Dieleman, Liesbeth van der Schans, Cees Reijneveld, Sijmen Acta Paediatr Regular Articles & Brief Reports AIM: A little is known about predictive validity of and professionals' adherence to language screening protocols. This study assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children and the effects of protocol deviations by professionals. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 124 children recruited and tested between October 2013 and December 2015. Children were recruited from four well child clinics in urban and rural areas. To validate the screening, we assessed children's language ability with standardised language tests following the 2‐year screening and 1 year later. We assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the screening and of protocol deviations. RESULTS: At 2 years, the sensitivity and specificity of the language screening were 0.79 and 0.86, and at 3 years 0.82 and 0.74, respectively. Protocol deviations by professionals were rare (7%) and did not significantly affect the validity of the screening. CONCLUSION: The language screening protocol was valid for detecting current and later language problems. Deviations from the protocol by professionals were rare and did not affect the concurrent nor predictive validity of the protocol. The 2‐year language screening supports professionals working in preventive child health care and deserves wider implementation in well child care. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-07-07 2021-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7891318/ /pubmed/32585043 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apa.15447 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Acta Paediatrica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Foundation Acta Paediatrica This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Regular Articles & Brief Reports
Visser‐Bochane, Margot
Luinge, Margreet
Dieleman, Liesbeth
van der Schans, Cees
Reijneveld, Sijmen
The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems
title The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems
title_full The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems
title_fullStr The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems
title_full_unstemmed The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems
title_short The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems
title_sort dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems
topic Regular Articles & Brief Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7891318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32585043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apa.15447
work_keys_str_mv AT visserbochanemargot thedutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT luingemargreet thedutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT dielemanliesbeth thedutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT vanderschanscees thedutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT reijneveldsijmen thedutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT visserbochanemargot dutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT luingemargreet dutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT dielemanliesbeth dutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT vanderschanscees dutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems
AT reijneveldsijmen dutchwellchildlanguagescreeningprotocolfor2yearoldchildrenwasvalidfordetectingcurrentandlaterlanguageproblems