Quality of Child Development Scales. A systematic Review
Keywords:
Downloads
Abstract
Developmental scales for children aged 0-6 years are a particularly valuable resource for assessing developmental milestones in children. Most scales are developed based on a broad conceptual framework, and their metric validation is insufficient and of low quality. The aim of this systematic review is to analyse the psychometric quality of these tests and identify aspects in need of improvement. To this end, the PRISMA methodology and the WOS and ProQuest databases were used to search for articles addressing this topic. A total of 680 articles were identified, of which 72 were selected using the established inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results indicate a scarcity of independent studies on the statistical measurement of the scales. The selected articles are very heterogeneous and validate these tests using adaptations of common metrics. Most perform cross-cultural, concurrent, and prognostic validations of the tests. We conclude that the quality of the scale metrics and other common aspects of these tests need to be improved, particularly sample sparsity and heterogeneity, as well as cultural biases. We underline the importance of applying for advances in metrics for the construction of developmental scales and recommend the use of computerised versions to improve their ease of use and efficiency.
Downloads
References
Albuquerque, P., Guerra, M., Lima, M., Eickmann, S. (2018). Concurrent validity of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale to detect delayed gross motor development in preterm infants: A comparative study with the Bayley III. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 21(6) 408-414. https://doi.org/10.1080/17518423.2017.1323974.
Google Scholar CrossrefAlcantud- Marín, F. & Alonso- Esteban, Y. (2016). Predictive value of the Merrill-Palmer-R scale applied during the first year of life. Educational psychology,22(2), 87-92 doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pse.2016.01.001
Google Scholar CrossrefAdolph, K. E. & Hoch, J. E. (2019). Motor development: Embodied, embedded, enculturated, and enabling. Annual Review of Psychology, 70(1), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102836
Google Scholar CrossrefAmer, A., Kakooza-Mwesige, A., Jarl, G., Tumwine, J., Forssberg, H., Eliasson, A.-C., Hermansson, L. (2018). The Uganda version of the Pediatric Disability Assessment Inventory (PEDI-UG). Part II: Psychometric properties. Child: Care, Health and Development, 44(4), 562-571. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12562
Google Scholar CrossrefAmundson, R., Kolobe, T., Arnold, S., McEwen, I. (2012). Concurrent validity of the school outcomes measures (SOM) and pediatric evaluation of disability inventory (PEDI) in preschool- aged children. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr, 35(1), 40-53. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/01942638.2014.975310
Google Scholar CrossrefAnderson, P. J. & Burnett, A. (2016). Assessment of developmental delay in early childhood: concerns with the Bayley-III scales. The clinical neuropsychologist,31(2), 371-381. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1216518
Google Scholar CrossrefAsún, R., & Zúñiga, C. (2008). Advantages of the Politomic Models of Item Response Theory in the Measurement of Social Attitudes: The Analysis of a Case. Psykhe, 17(2), 103-115.
Google Scholar CrossrefBaşdaş, Ö., Erdem, E., Elmali, F., Kurtoğlu, S. (2018). The Brazelton neonatal behavioral assessment scale: A validity and reliability study in a Turkish sample. (2018). Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, 48(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.3906/sag-1711-111.
Google Scholar CrossrefBayley, N. (2006). Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
Google Scholar CrossrefBerg, M., Dolva, A., Kleiven, J., Krumlinde-Sundholm, L. (2016). Normative Scores for the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory in Norway. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/01942638.2015.1050149
Google Scholar CrossrefBode, M., D'Eugenio, D., Mettelman, B., Gross, S. (2014). Predictive Validity of the Bayley, Third Edition at 2 Years for Intelligence Quotient at 4 Years in Preterm Infants. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 35(9), 570-5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000110
Google Scholar CrossrefBoonzaaijer, M., Suir I., Mollema, J., Nuysink, J., Volman, M., Jongmans, M. (2020). Factors associated with gross motor development from birth to independent walking: A systematic review of longitudinal research. Child Care Health & Development, 47(4), 525–561. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12830
Google Scholar CrossrefBrazelton, T., Nugent, J. (1997). Scale for the evaluation of neonatal behavior. Paidós.
Google Scholar CrossrefCardoso, F., Formiga, C., Bizinotto, T., Tessler, R., Blasbalg N., Francisco, R. (2017). Concurrent validity of the brunet-lézine scale with the bayley scale for assessment of the development of preterm infants up to two years. Revista Paulista de Pediatría, 35(2), 144-150. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-0462/;2017;35;2;00005
Google Scholar CrossrefCaudle, S., Katzenstein, J., S Oghalai, J., Lin, J., Caudle, D. (2014). Nonverbal cognitive development in children with cochlear implants: relationship between the Mullen Scales of Early Learning and later performance on the Leiter International Performance Scales-Revised. Assessment, 21(1), 119–128. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191112437594
Google Scholar CrossrefCommittee on Children with Disabilities. (2001). Developmental surveillance and screening of infants and young children. Pediatrics, 108, 192–195. doi: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/108/1/192
Google Scholar CrossrefCosta, R., Figueiredo, B., Tendais, I., Conde, A., Pacheco, A., Teixeira, C. (2010). Brazelton Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale: A psychometric study in a Portuguese sample. Infant Behavior & Development, 33(4),510-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2010.07.003
Google Scholar CrossrefDumas, H. M., Fragala-Pinkham, M. A., Rosen, E. L., & O'Brien, J. E. (2017). Construct validity of the pediatric evaluation of disability inventory computer adaptive test (PEDI-CAT) in children with medical complexity. Disability and rehabilitation, 39(23), 2446–2451. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1226406
Google Scholar CrossrefElbaum, B., Gattamorta, K., Penfield, R. (2010). Battelle Developmental Inventory Assessment, 2nd Edition, Screening for use in state child outcomes measurement systems under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Early Intervention Magazine, 32(4), 255–273. doi: https://doi.org/1053-4893; 1053-8151
Google Scholar CrossrefFernández, I., Álvarez, E., Estudi Llevant. (1989). The psychomotor development of 1,702 children from 0 to 24 months. University of Barcelona.
Google Scholar CrossrefFloyd, R., Gathercoal, K., Roid, G. (2004). No evidence for ethnic and racial bias in the Tryout Edition of the Merrill-Palmer Scale-Revised. Psychological Reports, 94 (1), 217-220. doi:https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.94.1.217-220
Google Scholar CrossrefFlynn, R., Huber, M., DeMauro, S. (2020). Predictive value of the BSID-II and the Bayley-III for cognitive function in early school age in very preterm infants. Global Pediatric Health, 7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2333794x20973146
Google Scholar CrossrefGleason, M. M. (2010). Recognizing young children in need of mental health assessment: Development and preliminary validity of the Early Childhood Screening Assessment. Infant Mental Health Journal, 31, 335–357. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.20259
Google Scholar CrossrefGoldin, R., Matson, J., Beighley, J., Jang, J. (2014). Autism spectrum disorder severity as a predictor of Battelle Developmental Inventory – Second Edition (BDI-2) scores in toddlers. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 17(1), 39–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2013.839585
Google Scholar CrossrefGreene, M., Patra, K., Nelson, M., Silvestri, J. (2012). Evaluating preterm infants with the Bayley-III: Patterns and correlates of development. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33(6), 1948–1956. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.05.024
Google Scholar CrossrefGreene, M., Patra, K., Silvestri, J., Nelson, M. (2013). Re-evaluating preterm infants with the Bayley-III: Patterns and predictors of change. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(7), 2107–2117. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2013.04.001
Google Scholar CrossrefGrondhuis, S. & Mulick, J. (2013). Comparison of the Leiter international performance scale - Revised and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, 5th Edition, in children with autism spectrum disorders. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 118(1), 44–54. doi: https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-118.1.44
Google Scholar CrossrefHaley, S., Coster, W., Ludlow, L., Haltiwanger, J., Andrellos, P. (1992). Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI). Development, standardization and manual administration. Trustees of Boston University.
Google Scholar CrossrefHanlon, C., Medhin, G., Worku, B., Tomlinson, M., Alem, A., Dewey, M., Prince, M. (2016). Adapting the Bayley Scales of infant and toddler development in Ethiopia: evaluation of reliability and validity. Child: Care, Health and Development, 42(5), 699–708. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12371
Google Scholar CrossrefWorld Health Organization. (2012). Developmental Difficulties in Early Childhood: Prevention, Early Identification, Assessment and Intervention in Low- and Middle-income Countries: A review.
Google Scholar CrossrefJary, S., Whitelaw, A., Walløe, L., Thoresen, M. (2013). Comparison of Bayley-2 and Bayley-3 scores at 18 months in term infants following neonatal encephalopathy and therapeutic hypothermia. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 55(11), 1053–1059. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12208.
Google Scholar CrossrefJohnson-Martin, N. M., Jens, Kenneth, G., Attermeier, S. M., & Hacker, B. J. (1994). Carolina Curriculum: Assessment and Exercises for Infants and Toddlers with Special Needs. Retrieved from: http://hdl.handle.net/11162/59068
Google Scholar CrossrefJosse, D., Brunet, O., & Lézine, I. (1997). Brunet Lèzine Revised: Early Childhood Psychomotor Development Scale. Symtec.
Google Scholar CrossrefKamppi, D. & Gilmore, L. (2010). Assessing cognitive development in early childhood: A comparison of the Bayley-III and the Stanford-Binet- V. The Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 27(02). doi: https://doi.org/10.1375/aedp.27.2.70
Google Scholar CrossrefKarasik, L. B., & Robinson, S. R. (2022). Milestones or Millstones: How Standard Assessments Mask Cultural Variation and Misinform Policies Aimed at Early Childhood Development. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9(1), 57–64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/23727322211068546
Google Scholar CrossrefKorkman, M., Kirk, U., & Kemp, S. (2007). NEPSY-II. NCS Pearson Inc.
Google Scholar CrossrefKrogh, M. & Væver, M. (2019a). Does gender affect Bayley-III scores and test-taking behavior? Infant Behavior and Development. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2019.101352
Google Scholar CrossrefKrogh, M. & Væver, M. (2019b). A longitudinal study of the predictive validity of the Bayley-III scales and subtests. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(6), 727–738. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2018.1485563
Google Scholar CrossrefLalor, J. P., & Rodriguez, P. (2022). py-irt: A scalable item response theory library for python. INFORMS Journal on Computing. doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.2022.1250
Google Scholar CrossrefLiao, P., & Campbell, S. (2004). Examination of the Item Structure of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale. Pediatric Physical Therapy, 16(1), 31–38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pep.0000114843.92102.98
Google Scholar CrossrefLin, L., Tu, Y., Yu, W., Ho, M., Wu, P. (2020). Investigation of fine motor performance in children younger than 36-month-old using PDMS-2 and Bayley-III. European. Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17(5), 1–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2020.1732917
Google Scholar CrossrefLópez, J. A. (1995). Estimation of parameters in TRI: A Bilog evaluation in small samples. Psicothema, 7(1), 173-185.
Google Scholar CrossrefLowe, J., Erickson, S., Schrader, R., Dunca, A. (2012). Comparison of the Bayley II Mental Developmental Index and the Bayley III cognitive scale: are we measuring the same thing? Acta Paedratica,101(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2011.02517
Google Scholar CrossrefLundqvist, C., Sabel, K. (2000). The Brazelton Neonatal Behavioral assessment scale detects differences among newborn infants of optimal health. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 25(8), 577-582. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/25.8.577
Google Scholar CrossrefMånsson, J., Stjernqvist, K., Serenius, F., Ådén, U., Källén, K. (2019). Agreement Between Bayley-III Measurements and WISC-IV Measurements in Typically Developing Children. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 37(5), 603-616. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282918781431
Google Scholar CrossrefMånsson, J., Källén, K., Eklöf, E., Serenius, F., Ådén, U., Stjernqvist, K. (2021). The ability of Bayley‐III scores to predict later intelligence in children born extremely preterm. Acta Paediatrica missing data in this reference. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.16037
Google Scholar CrossrefMayrand, L., Mazer, B., Menard, S., Chilingaryan, G. (2009). Screening for motor deficits using the pediatric evaluation of disability inventory (PEDI) in children with language impairment. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 12(3), 139–145. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17518420902936722
Google Scholar CrossrefMcCoy, D. C. (2022). Building a model of cultural universality with specificity for global early childhood development. Child Development Perspectives, 16, 27–33. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12438
Google Scholar CrossrefMilne, S., Mcdonald, J. Comino, E. (2015). Alternate scoring of the Bayley-III improves prediction of performance on Griffiths Mental Development Scales before school entry in preschoolers with developmental concerns. Child: Care, Health and Development, 41(2), 203–212. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-015-0457-x
Google Scholar CrossrefMoore, T., Johnson, S., Haider, S., Hennessy, E., Marlow, N. (2012). Relationship between test scores using the second and third editions of the bayley scales in extremely preterm children. The Journal of Pediatrics, 160 (4), 553–558. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2011.09.047
Google Scholar CrossrefMoragas, C., Deu, A., Mussons, F., Costa, E., Zurita, M. (2007). Psychometric evaluation of the Brazelton Scale in a sample of Spanish newborns. Psicotema, 19(1), 140-9.
Google Scholar CrossrefMorsan, V., Fantoni, C., Tallandini, M. (2018). Age correction in cognitive, linguistic, and motor domains for infants born preterm: an analysis of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition developmental patterns. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 60(8), 820-825. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.13735
Google Scholar CrossrefMuñiz, J., Fidalgo, A., García-Cueto, E., Martínez, R., Moreno, R. (2005). Analysis of the items. The Wall.
Google Scholar CrossrefMuñiz, J. (2010). Test of Theories of the Classical Theory and Theory of Responses to Items. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 57-66.
Google Scholar CrossrefNewborg, J. (2005). Battelle Developmental Inventory - second edition. Riverside.
Google Scholar CrossrefNishijima, M., Yoshida, T., Matsumura, K., Inomata, S., Nagaoka, M., Tamura, K., Makimoto, M. (2021). Correlation between the Bayley‐III at 3 years and WISC‐IV at 6 years. Pediatrics International missing data in this reference. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ped.14872
Google Scholar CrossrefNitsana, M. (2011). The Battelle Developmental Inventory, 2nd Edition: A study of Concurrent Validity and Stability in Young Children with Known Disabilities Chairperson missing data in this reference, Umi Dissertation Publishing.
Google Scholar CrossrefNordmark, E., Jarnlo, G., Hägglund, G. (2000). Comparison of the Gross Motor Function Measure and Paediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory in assessing motor function in children undergoing selective dorsal rhizotomy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 42(4), 245–252. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0012162200000426
Google Scholar CrossrefOlusanya, B., Hadders-Algra, M., Breinbauer, C., Williams, A., Newton, C. R., & Davis, A. (2021). The conundrum of a global tool for early childhood development to monitor SDG indicator 4.2.1. The Lancet Global Health, 9(5), e586– e587. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00030-9
Google Scholar CrossrefPage, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., Mulrow, C.D., Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery 10, 88. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4
Google Scholar CrossrefPeters, M. (2013). Determining the Clinical Utility of the Merrill-Palmer-Revised Scales of Development in a Sample of Children with Autistic Disorder. George Fox University.
Google Scholar CrossrefPeyton, M., Wroblewski, K., Rogers, E., Kohn, M., Glass, H (2020). Simultaneous validity of the Warner Assessment of Early Development of Functional and Adaptive Skills and the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition. Developmental medicine and child neurology,63(3), 349–354. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.14737
Google Scholar CrossrefRoid, G. & Miller, L. (1997). LEITER-R International Manipulative Scale. Psymtec.
Google Scholar CrossrefRoid, G., Sampers, J., Anderson, G., Erickson, J., Post, P. (20004). Merrill-Palmer- Revised. Scales of Development. Stoelting Company.
Google Scholar CrossrefScattone, D., Raggio, D., May, W. (2011). Comparison of The Vineland adaptive behavior scales, second edition, and the Bayley scales of infant and toddler development, third edition. Psychological Reports, 109(2), 626–634. doi: https://doi.org/10.2466/03.10.PR0.109.5.626-634
Google Scholar CrossrefSharp, M., & DeMauro, S. (2017). Counterbalanced comparison of the BSID-II and Bayley-III at eighteen to twenty-two months corrected age. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 38 (5), 322–329. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000441
Google Scholar CrossrefSilva, M., Mendonça, F., Euclides J., Mônego, B., Bandeira, D. (2018). Instruments for multidimensional assessment of child development: a systematic review. Early Child Development and Care, 1–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2018.1528243
Google Scholar CrossrefSipes, M., Matson, J., Turygin, N. (2011) The use of the Battelle Developmental Inventory - Second Edition (BDI-2) as an early evaluator of autism spectrum disorders. Developmental neurorehabilitation, 14(5), 310–314. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2011.598477
Google Scholar CrossrefSparrow, S., Cicchetti, D., & Balla, D. (2005). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (2nd ed.). Circle Pines.
Google Scholar CrossrefSpittle, A., Spencer-Smith, M., Eeles, A., Lee, K., Lorefice, L., Anderson, P., Doyle, L. (2013). Does the Bayley-III Motor Scale at 2 years predict motor outcome at 4 years in very preterm children? Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 55(5), 448–452. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12049
Google Scholar CrossrefTorras-Mañá, M., Guillamón-Valenzuela, M., Ramírez-Mallafré, A., Brun-Gasca, C., Fornieles-Deu, A. (2014). Usefulness of the Bayley scales of infant and toddler development, third edition, in the early diagnosis of language disorder. Psicotema, 26(3), 349-56. doi: https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2014.29
Google Scholar CrossrefTorras-Mañá, M., Gómez-Morales, A., González-Gimeno, I., Fornieles-Deu, A., Brun-Gasca, C. (2016). Assessment of cognition and language in the early diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder: Usefulness of the Bayley Scales of infant and toddler development, third edition. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 60(5), 502–511. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12291
Google Scholar CrossrefVierhaus, M., Lohaus, A., Kolling, T., Teubert, M., Keller, H., Fassbender, I., Freitag, C., Goertz, C., Graf, F., Lamm, B., Spangler, S. M., Knopf, M., Schwarzer, G. (2011). The development of 3- to 9-month-old infants in two cultural contexts: Bayley longitudinal results for Cameroonian and German infants. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 8(3), 349–366. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2010.505392
Google Scholar CrossrefVisser, L., Ruiter, S., van der Meulen, B., Ruijssenaars, W., Timmerman, M. (2012). A Review of Standardized Developmental Assessment Instruments for Young Children and Their Applicability for Children with Special Needs. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 11(2), 102–127. doi: https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.11.2.102
Google Scholar CrossrefVos-Vromans, D., Ketelaar, M., Gorter, J. (2005). Responsiveness of evaluative measures for children with cerebral palsy: The Gross Motor Function Measure and the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory. Disability & Rehabilitation, 27(20), 1245–1252. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280500076178
Google Scholar CrossrefWenger, I., Schulze, C., Kottorp, A. (2020). Are the American normative standard scores applicable to the German version of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI-G)? Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 28(2), 1–11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2020.1726452
Google Scholar CrossrefYang, S., Paynter, J., Gilmore, L. (2016). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales: II Profile of Young Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(1), 64–73. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2543-1
Google Scholar CrossrefYao, S., Bull, R., Khng, K., Rahim, A. (2018). Psychometric properties of the NEPSY-II affect recognition subtest in a preschool sample: a Rasch modeling approach. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 1-18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2017.1343865
Google Scholar CrossrefDownloads
Published
Almetric
Dimensions
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Araceli Sánchez Raya, Sara Maria Luque de Dios, Juan Antonio Moriana Elvira
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles are published under Creative Commons copyright (CC BY). Authors hold the copyright and retain publishing rights without restrictions, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy articles as the original source is cited.
