Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of parent or caregiver-completed development screening tools with Bayley Scales of Infant Development: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Balasubramanian, Haribalakrishna; Ahmed, Javed; Ananthan, Anitha; Srinivasan, Lakshmi; Mohan, Diwakar.
Afiliação
  • Balasubramanian H; Department of Neonatology, Surya Hospitals, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India drhari@suryahospitals.com.
  • Ahmed J; Department of Neonatology, McMaster Childrens Hospital and McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
  • Ananthan A; Department of Neonatology, Seth GS Medical College and King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
  • Srinivasan L; Department of Pediatrics, The Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
  • Mohan D; Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 May 29.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38811056
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Parent/caregiver-completed developmental testing (PCDT) is integral to developmental care in children; however, there is limited information on its accuracy. In this systematic review, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of PCDT with concurrently administered Bayley Scales of Infant Development for detection of developmental delay (DD) in children below 4 years of age.

METHODS:

We searched databases PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Google Scholar until November 2023. Bivariate and multiple thresholds summary receiver operating characteristics were used to obtain the summary sensitivity and specificity with 95% CIs. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool was used for risk of bias assessment.

RESULTS:

A total of 38 studies (31 in the meta-analysis) were included. Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) and Parent Report of Children's Abilities-Revised (PARCA-R) were the most commonly evaluated PCDTs. ASQ score >2 SD below the mean had an overall sensitivity of 0.72 (0.6, 0.82) and 0.63 (0.50, 0.75) at a median specificity of 0.89 (0.82, 0.94) and 0.81 (0.76, 0.86) for diagnosing moderate to severe DD and severe DD, respectively. PARCA- R had an overall sensitivity of 0.69 (0.51, 0.83) at median specificity of 0.75 (0.64, 0.83) for predicting severe DD. Participant selection bias and partial verification bias were found in over 50% of the studies. The certainty of evidence was low for the studied outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS:

The most commonly studied parental tools, ASQ and PARCA-R, have moderate to low sensitivity and moderate specificity for detecting DD in young children. High risk of bias and heterogeneity in the available data can potentially impact the interpretation of our results. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42021268629.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article