Premium
The psychometric properties of the Ages & Stages Questionnaires for ages 2‐2.5: a systematic review
Author(s) -
Velikonja T.,
EdbrookeChilds J.,
Calderon A.,
Sleed M.,
Brown A.,
Deighton J.
Publication year - 2017
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.12397
Subject(s) - reliability (semiconductor) , population , inclusion (mineral) , psychology , clinical psychology , medicine , developmental psychology , social psychology , power (physics) , physics , environmental health , quantum mechanics
Background Early identification of children with potential development delay is essential to ensure access to care. The Ages & Stages Questionnaires (ASQ) is used as population outcome indicators in England as part of the 2.5‐year review. Method The aim of this article was to systematically review the worldwide evidence for the psychometric properties of the ASQ third edition (ASQ‐3 TM ) and the Ages & Stages Questionnaires®: Social‐Emotional (ASQ:SE). Eight electronic databases and grey literature were searched for original research studies available in English language, which reported reliability, validity or responsiveness of the ASQ‐3 TM or ASQ:SE for children aged between 2 and 2.5 years. Twenty studies were included. Eligible studies used either the ASQ‐3 TM or the ASQ:SE and reported at least one measurement property of the ASQ‐3 TM and/or ASQ:SE. Data were extracted from all papers identified for final inclusion, drawing on Cochrane guidelines. Results Using ‘positive’, ‘intermediate’ and ‘negative’ criteria for evaluating psychometric properties, results showed ‘positive’ reliability values in 11/18 instances reported, ‘positive’ sensitivity values in 13/18 instances reported and ‘positive’ specificity values in 19/19 instances reported. Conclusions Variations in age or language versions used, quality of psychometric properties and quality of papers resulted in heterogeneous evidence. It is important to consider differences in cultural and contextual factors when measuring child development using these indicators. Further research is very likely to have an important impact on the interpretation of the ASQ‐3 TM and ASQ:SE psychometric evidence.