Dataset Information

Comparative Accuracy of Developmental Screening Questionnaires.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Universal developmental screening is widely recommended, yet studies of the accuracy of commonly used questionnaires reveal mixed results, and previous comparisons of these questionnaires are hampered by important methodological differences across studies.

Objective

To compare the accuracy of 3 developmental screening instruments as standardized tests of developmental status.

Design, setting, and participants

This cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study recruited consecutive parents in waiting rooms at 10 pediatric primary care offices in eastern Massachusetts between October 1, 2013, and January 31, 2017. Parents were included if they were sufficiently literate in the English or Spanish language to complete a packet of screening questionnaires and if their child was of eligible age. Parents completed all questionnaires in counterbalanced order. Participants who screened positive on any questionnaire plus 10% of those who screened negative on all questionnaires (chosen at random) were invited to complete developmental testing. Analyses were weighted for sampling and nonresponse and were conducted from October 1, 2013, to January 31, 2017.

Exposures

The 3 screening instruments used were the Ages & Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition (ASQ-3); Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS); and Survey of Well-being of Young Children (SWYC): Milestones.

Main outcomes and measures

Reference tests administered were Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition, for children aged 0 to 42 months, and Differential Ability Scales, Second Edition, for older children. Age-standardized scores were used as indicators of mild (80-89), moderate (70-79), or severe (<70) delays.

Results

A total of 1495 families of children aged 9 months to 5.5 years participated. The mean (SD) age of the children at enrollment was 2.6 (1.3) years, and 779 (52.1%) were male. Parent respondents were primarily female (1325 [88.7%]), with a mean (SD) age of 33.4 (6.3) years. Of the 20.5% to 29.0% of children with a positive score on each questionnaire, 35% to 60% also received a positive score on a second questionnaire, demonstrating moderate co-occurrence. Among younger children (<42 months), the specificity of the ASQ-3 (89.4%; 95% CI, 85.9%-92.1%) and SWYC Milestones (89.0%; 95% CI, 86.1%-91.4%) was higher than that of the PEDS (79.6%; 95% CI, 75.7%-83.1%; P?Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that 3 frequently used screening questionnaires offer adequate specificity but modest sensitivity for detecting developmental delays among children aged 9 months to 5 years. The results suggest that trade-offs in sensitivity and specificity occurred among the questionnaires, with no one questionnaire emerging superior overall.

SUBMITTER: Sheldrick RC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7042946 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative Accuracy of Developmental Screening Questionnaires.

Sheldrick R Christopher RC Marakovitz Susan S Garfinkel Daryl D Carter Alice S AS Perrin Ellen C EC

JAMA pediatrics 20200401 4

<h4>Importance</h4>Universal developmental screening is widely recommended, yet studies of the accuracy of commonly used questionnaires reveal mixed results, and previous comparisons of these questionnaires are hampered by important methodological differences across studies.<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the accuracy of 3 developmental screening instruments as standardized tests of developmental status.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study recruit ...[more]

PMID: 32065615

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFactors contributing to the accurate measurement of self-reported physical activity are not well understood in middle-aged adults. We investigated the associations between two self-reported surveys and objectively measured physical activity in middle-aged adults, and the influence of individual and sociodemographic factors on these associations, at different intensities utilizing an observational study design.MethodsParticipants (n = 156) wore a SenseWear Armband™ (SWA) for a continuous seven-day period over the triceps of the left arm, to measure energy expenditure in metabolic equivalents. Participants also completed the Physical Activity Recall questionnaire (PAR) and Active Australia Survey (AAS). Associations were analyzed separately in general linear models for each intensity. The influence of individual and sociodemographic factors was assessed through moderator analyses.ResultsThe PAR and SWA were significantly positively associated at moderate (β = 0.68, 95% CI 0.16-1.20), vigorous (β = 0.36, 95% CI 0.20-0.53), moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) (β = 0.52, 95% CI 0.20-0.83), and total METmins (β = 0.63, 95% CI 0.35-0.90), the AAS and SWA were associated at all intensities (moderate (β = 0.41, 95% CI 0.15-0.67), vigorous (β = 0.32, 95% CI 0.19-0.46), MVPA (β = 0.42, 95% CI 0.18-0.65) and total METmins (β = 0.62, 95% CI 0.29-0.96). A significant interaction between the PAR and sex for vigorous-intensity unveiled a weaker association in women. Both surveys tended to under-report physical activity. The largest margins of error were present at light and moderate intensities. For the PAR, participants reported over 20 hours, or 69% less light physical activity than recorded by the SWA per week. For the AAS, participants reported over 7 hours, or 38% less moderate physical activity. Compared to lighter intensities, time spent at a vigorous intensity was overreported by participants with the PAR and AAS by 91 and 43 minutes per week, respectively. The addition of Body Mass Index (BMI) resulted in non-significant interactions between the PAR and SWA for moderate-intensity, and the AAS and SWA for vigorous-intensity; a significant interaction between AAS and BMI indicated that the strength of the association differed by BMI for vigorous-intensity.ConclusionsThe PAR and AAS are not equivalent to the SWA, and sex and BMI may alter the associations between the measures.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Comorbid depression is common among patients with diabetes and has severe health consequences, but often remains unrecognized. Several questionnaires are used to screen for depression. A systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the diagnostic accuracy of depression questionnaires in adults with diabetes is unavailable. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of depression questionnaires in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. METHODS:PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 28 February 2018. Studies were included when the diagnostic accuracy of depression questionnaires was assessed in a diabetes population and the reference standard was a clinical interview. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer and checked by another. Two reviewers independently conducted the quality assessment (QUADAS-2). Diagnostic accuracy was pooled in bivariate random effects models. The main outcome was diagnostic accuracy, expressed as sensitivity and specificity, of depression questionnaires in an adult diabetes population. This study is reported according to PRISMA-DTA and is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018092950). RESULTS:A total 6,097 peer-reviewed articles were screened. Twenty-one studies (N = 5,703 patients) met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Twelve different depression questionnaires were identified, of which the CES-D (n = 6 studies) and PHQ-9 (n = 7 studies) were the most frequently evaluated. Risk of bias was unclear for multiple domains in the majority of studies. In the meta-analyses, five (N = 1,228) studies of the CES-D (?16), five (N = 1,642) of the PHQ-9 (?10) and four (N = 822) of the algorithm of the PHQ-9 were included in the pooled analysis. The CES-D (?16) had a pooled sensitivity of 85.0% (95%CI, 71.3-92.8%) and a specificity of 71.6% (95%CI, 62.5-79.2%); the PHQ-9 (?10) had a sensitivity of 81.5% (95%CI, 57.1-93.5%) and a specificity of 79.7% (95%CI, 62.1-90.4%). The algorithm for the PHQ-9 had a sensitivity of 60.9% (95%CI, 52.3-90.8%) and a specificity of 64.0% (95%CI, 53.0-93.9%). CONCLUSIONS:This review indicates that the CES-D had the highest sensitivity, whereas the PHQ-9 had the highest specificity, although confidence intervals were wide and overlapping. The algorithm for the PHQ-9 had the lowest sensitivity and specificity. Given the variance in results and suboptimal reporting of studies, further high quality studies are needed to confirm the diagnostic accuracy of these depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes.

Dataset Information

Comparative Accuracy of Developmental Screening Questionnaires.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Publications

Comparative Accuracy of Developmental Screening Questionnaires.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets