Association Between Family Income and Positive Developmental Screening Using the Infant Toddler Checklist at the 18-Month Health Supervision Visit.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the associations between several potential predictors (child biologic, social, and family factors) and a positive screen for developmental delay using the Infant Toddler Checklist (ITC) at the 18-month health supervision visit in primary care. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of healthy children attending an 18-month health supervision visit in primary care. Parents completed a standardized questionnaire, addressing child, social, and family characteristics, and the ITC. Logistic regression analyses were used to assess the associations between predictors and a positive ITC. RESULTS: Among 2188 participants (45.5% female; mean age, 18.2 months), 285 (13%) had a positive ITC and 1903 (87%) had a negative ITC. The aOR for a positive ITC for male compared with female sex was 2.15 (95% CI, 1.63-2.83; P < .001). The aOR for birthweight was 0.65 per 1 kg increase (95% CI, 0.53-0.80; P < .001). The aOR for a family income of <$40,000 compared with ≥$150,000 was 3.50 (95% CI, 2.22-5.53; P < .001), and the aOR for family income between $40,000-$79,999 compared with ≥$150,000 was 1.88 (95% CI, 1.26-2.80; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Screening positive on the ITC may identify children at risk for the double jeopardy of developmental delay and social disadvantage and allow clinicians to intervene through monitoring, referral, and resource navigation for both child development and social needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01869530).

Screening for marginal food security in young children in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Household food insecurity (FI), even at marginal levels, is associated with poor child health outcomes. The Nutrition Screening Tool for Every Preschooler (NutriSTEP®) is a valid and reliable 17-item parent-completed measure of nutrition risk and includes a single item addressing FI which may be a useful child-specific screening tool. We evaluated the diagnostic test properties of the single NutriSTEP® FI question using the 2-item Hunger Vital Sign™ as the criterion measure in a primary care population of healthy children ages 18 months to 5 years. RESULTS: The sample included 1174 families, 53 (4.5%) of which were marginally food secure. An affirmative response to the single NutriSTEP® question "I have difficulty buying food I want to feed my child because food is expensive" had a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 91% and demonstrated good construct validity when compared with the Hunger Vital Sign™. CONCLUSION: The single NutriSTEP® question may be an effective screening tool in clinical practice to identify marginal food security in families with young children and to link families with community-based services or financial assistance programs including tax benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: TARGet Kids! practice-based research network (Registered June 5, 2013 at www.clinicaltrials.gov ; NCT01869530); www.targetkids.ca.

Predictive Validity of the Infant Toddler Checklist in Primary Care at the 18-month Visit and School Readiness at 4 to 6 Years.

OBJECTIVE: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends developmental surveillance and screening in early childhood in primary care. The 18-month visit may be an ideal time for identification of children with delays in language and communication, or symptoms of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Little is known about the predictive validity of developmental screening tools administered at 18 months. Our objective was to examine the predictive validity of the Infant Toddler Checklist (ITC) at the 18-month health supervision visit, using school readiness at kindergarten age as the criterion measure. METHODS: We designed a prospective cohort study, recruiting in primary care in Toronto, Canada. Parents completed the ITC at the 18-month visit. Teachers completed the Early Development Instrument (EDI) when the children were in Kindergarten, age 4-6 years. We calculated screening test properties with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses adjusted for important covariates. RESULTS: Of 293 children (mean age 18 months), 30 (10.2%) had a positive ITC including: concern for speech delay (n = 11, 3.8%), concern for other communication delay (n = 13, 4.4%), and concern for both (n = 6, 2.0%). At follow-up (mean age 5 years), 54 (18.4%) had overall EDI vulnerability, 19 (6.5%) had vulnerability on the 2 EDI communication domains. The ITC sensitivity ranged from 11% to 32%, specificity from 91% to 96%, false positive rates from 4% to 9%, PPV from 16% to 35%, NPV from 83% to 95%. A positive ITC screen and ITC concern for speech delay were associated with lower scores in EDI communication skills and general knowledge (ß = -1.08; 95% CI: -2.10, -0.17; ß = -2.35; 95% CI: -3.63, -1.32) and EDI language and cognitive development (ß = -0.62; 95% CI: -1.25, -0.18; ß = -1.22; 95% CI: -2.11, -0.58). CONCLUSIONS: The ITC demonstrated high specificity suggesting that most children with a negative ITC screen will demonstrate school readiness at 4-6 years, and low false positive rates, minimizing over-diagnosis. The ITC had low sensitivity highlighting the importance of ongoing developmental surveillance and screening.