Premium
Augustus E. Jordan, Ph.D.
Author(s) -
Brachlow Allison,
Tervo Raymond
Publication year - 2001
Publication title -
the journal of rural health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.439
H-Index - 57
eISSN - 1748-0361
pISSN - 0890-765X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2001.tb00951.x
Subject(s) - reservation , cheyenne , native american , test (biology) , suspect , african american , gerontology , medicine , white (mutation) , demography , screening test , family medicine , geography , psychology , genealogy , archaeology , history , ethnology , sociology , political science , ecology , biology , law , criminology , biochemistry , gene
Screening results for the Child Development Review (CDR) and the Denver II Developmental Screening Test (Denver II) were compared in two locations: the Cheyenne River Reservation in South Dakota and Sioux Falls, S.D. Seventy‐three white, Native American and other minority children, half originating from the reservation and half from Sioux Falls, were randomly assigned to take one developmental screening test. A chi‐square analysis indicated a significant difference in results across tests. Specifically, more CDR than Denver II subjects passed the screening and more Denver II than CDR subjects failed the screening. This pattern held for subjects living on, but not off, the reservation. Thus, for Native American, white and other minority children living on the Cheyenne River Reservation, the CDR may be undersen‐sitive and/or the Denver II oversensitive to suspect presentations. Medical practitioners are advised to use these instruments with caution in rural settings.