Brazilian Validation of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale | Zendy

Nádia Cristina Valentini | Zendy; Raquel Saccani | Zendy

AI Assistant Blog Pricing

Home ZAIA Blog

Open Access

Brazilian Validation of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale

Author(s) -

Nádia Cristina Valentini,

Raquel Saccani

Publication year - 2011

Publication title -

physical therapy

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 0.998

H-Index - 150

eISSN - 1538-6724

pISSN - 0031-9023

DOI - 10.2522/ptj.20110036

Subject(s) - percentile , construct validity , brazilian portuguese , scale (ratio) , psychology , sitting , predictive power , predictive validity , reliability (semiconductor) , supine position , population , physical therapy , clarity , medicine , physical medicine and rehabilitation , developmental psychology , psychometrics , portuguese , statistics , environmental health , geography , cartography , mathematics , power (physics) , surgery , philosophy , linguistics , chemistry , pathology , biochemistry , epistemology , quantum mechanics , physics

Background The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) is a well-known motor assessment tool used to identify potential delays in infants' motor development. Although Brazilian researchers and practitioners have used the AIMS in laboratories and clinical settings, its translation to Portuguese and validation for the Brazilian population is yet to be investigated. Objective This study aimed to translate and validate all AIMS items with respect to internal consistency and content, criterion, and construct validity. Design A cross-sectional and longitudinal design was used. Methods A cross-cultural translation was used to generate a Brazilian-Portuguese version of the AIMS. In addition, a validation process was conducted involving 22 professionals and 766 Brazilian infants (aged 0–18 months). Results The results demonstrated language clarity and internal consistency for the motor criteria (motor development score, α=.90; prone, α=.85; supine, α=.92; sitting, α=.84; and standing, α=.86). The analysis also revealed high discriminative power to identify typical and atypical development (motor development score, P<.001; percentile, P=.04; classification criterion, χ2=6.03; P=.05). Temporal stability (P=.07) (rho=.85, P<.001) was observed, and predictive power (P<.001) was limited to the group of infants aged from 3 months to 9 months. Limitations Limited predictive validity was observed, which may have been due to the restricted time that the groups were followed longitudinally. Conclusions In sum, the translated version of AIMS presented adequate validity and reliability.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research