Premium
Developmental evaluation at age 4: Validity of an Italian parental questionnaire
Author(s) -
Dall'Oglio Anna Maria,
Rossiello Barbara,
Coletti Maria Franca,
Caselli Maria Cristina,
Ravà Lucilla,
Di Ciommo Vincenzo,
Orzalesi Marcello,
Giannantoni Patrizia,
Pasqualetti Patrizio
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
journal of paediatrics and child health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.631
H-Index - 76
eISSN - 1440-1754
pISSN - 1034-4810
DOI - 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2010.01748.x
Subject(s) - cronbach's alpha , medicine , neuropsychology , internal consistency , concurrent validity , cognition , clinical psychology , gross motor skill , neuropsychological assessment , pediatrics , developmental psychology , motor skill , psychometrics , psychology , psychiatry
Aim: To validate an Italian parental questionnaire designed to evaluate the neuropsychological and behavioural developmental status of 4‐year‐olds and identify children in need of further evaluation. Methods: The questionnaire ( Questionario per la valutazione dello Sviluppo di bambini a 4 anni – Genitori (QS4‐G) ) consisted of 93 questions divided into 10 areas: language, visual‐motor abilities, memory/attention, fine and gross motor and self‐help abilities, lateralisation, social skills, stress, sleep, alimentation and evacuation. It was distributed to 263 parents of 4‐year‐olds: 94 healthy preterm (gestational age <33 weeks and/or <1500 g, without major neurosensory damage); 44 children with developmental disorders and 125 children with typical development. Cognitive and neuropsychological evaluations were performed using standardised tests. Results: The internal consistency of the areas was adequate (Cronbach's alpha: 0.69–0.79). The correlation coefficients ( r =|0.30|–|0.68|) with standardised tests (Griffiths, Vineland and neuropsychological tests) indicated a good concurrent validity. The receiver operating characteristic curve, for predicting a Griffiths Quotient less than 81, showed an area under the curve of 0.90 and a high diagnostic and discriminatory capacity (sensitivity of 0.88 and specificity of 0.84) for the optimal cut‐off (value 48.4). Conclusion: The QS4‐G seems to be a valid tool for identifying 4‐year‐old children at risk for low or borderline cognitive development and/or problematic behaviour who need a complete assessment. It can describe individual neuropsychological profiles. QS4‐G is not a diagnostic tool. It is useful for outcome studies in preterm children and in other pathologies. It could also be useful for preschooler prevention programmes.