Premium
Alternate scoring of the B ayley‐ III improves prediction of performance on G riffiths M ental D evelopment S cales before school entry in preschoolers with developmental concerns
Author(s) -
Milne S. L.,
McDonald J. L.,
Comino E. J.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
child: care, health and development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.832
H-Index - 82
eISSN - 1365-2214
pISSN - 0305-1862
DOI - 10.1111/cch.12177
Subject(s) - quotient , medicine , intelligence quotient , mathematics , combinatorics , psychiatry , cognition
Background The B ayley‐ III is widely used as an assessment tool in young children; however, its standard composite scores appear to under‐estimate delay, severe and profound delay cannot be identified, and the lack of an overall score makes it difficult to compare results with later assessments. Aims To explore the use of B ayley‐ III quotient subtest and average scores, compared with composite subtest and average scores for both clinical and research purposes, comparing their ability to predict performance on the G riffiths M ental D evelopment S cales ( G riffiths) before school entry. Method One hundred preschoolers referred for a diagnosis were assessed on the B ayley‐ III before 3.5 years. They were reassessed before school entry on the G riffiths. Composite and quotient scores were calculated and their ability to predict outcome compared across the score range. Results Averaging the three subscale quotient scores ( B ayley‐ AQS ) gave a similar mean score for this sample (61.1, SD 16.2) as for the Griffiths general quotient ( G riffiths‐ GQ ) (61.1, SD 19.6). The average composite scores ( B ayley‐ ACS ) had a significantly higher mean (74.2, SD 12.1). Correlations between the average scores on the B ayley‐ III and the G riffiths‐ GQ (0.8) were at least as strong as any of the individual subscale scores. Kappa coefficients showed that B ayley‐ AQS was superior to B ayley‐ ACS for predicting moderate and severe delay. Average change in scores was −0.1 for B ayley‐ AQS , and −13.2 for B ayley‐ ACS . Improvement in category of delay was seen in 28% of children using B ayley‐ AQS , and deterioration in 22%. In contrast, 5% improvement was seen using B ayley‐ ACS , and 65% deterioration. Conclusions The three directly assessed subscales of the B ayley‐ III can be averaged to give an overall score. B ayley‐ AQS are a better measure of development in young children with delay than B ayley‐ ACS , and most children maintain their developmental classification using this method of scoring when re‐assessed before school entry.