Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Denver Developmental Screening Test / Journal articles

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Denver Developmental Screening Test.

Journal articles on the topic 'Denver Developmental Screening Test'

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 3 March 2023

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Denver Developmental Screening Test.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Dick, Nathan P., Gillian Bryant, and Kathleen Davies. "Denver Developmental Screening Test." Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 15, no. 6 (November 12, 2008): 849–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1973.tb04929.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Koupernik, Cyrille. "THE DENVER DEVELOPMENTAL SCREENING TEST." Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 10, no. 6 (November 12, 2008): 796a—797a. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1968.tb02985.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

HERSHER, LEONARD. "Denver Developmental Test Problems." Pediatrics 86, no. 1 (July 1, 1990): 148–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.86.1.148b.

Full text

Abstract:

To the Editor.— Although 80% of pediatricians feel that their training in assessing a child's development was inadequate,1 it is estimated that between 20 million to 30 million children have been screened worldwide with the Denver Developmental Screening Test.2 With ith so many children tested by so many inadequately trained physicians or their assistants, it is virtually unavoidable that the test sometimes will be used incorrectly. One effect of improper testing may be the not inconsiderable raising of anxiety among parents who are told that their children are developmentally delayed when in fact they are entirely normal.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Fung, K. P., and S. P. Lau. "Denver Developmental Screening Test: Cultural variables." Journal of Pediatrics 106, no. 2 (February 1985): 343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3476(85)80321-8.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Elliman, A. M., E. M. Bryan, A. D. Elliman, P. Palmer, and L. Dubowitz. "Denver developmental screening test and preterm infants." Archives of Disease in Childhood 60, no. 1 (January 1, 1985): 20–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/adc.60.1.20.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

ADESMAN, ANDREW R. "Is the Denver II Developmental Test Worthwhile?" Pediatrics 90, no. 6 (December 1, 1992): 1009–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.90.6.1009.

Full text

Abstract:

To the Editor.— The recent study by Glascoe et al1 assessing the accuracy of the Denver II is undoubtedly the first of many which will look at the clinical utility of this new, unvalidated developmental screening instrument. I am writing to express concerns about the methodology of this study and, more importantly, to express caution regarding use of the Denver II as a screening test prior to its validation. Glascoe et al examined the accuracy of the Denver II using several different approaches to test interpretation and found that it generally led to overreferral.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Sriyaporn, Poolsook P., W. Pissasoontorn, and Orathai Sakdisawadi. "Denver Developmental Screening Test Survey of Bangkok Children." Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health 7, no. 3 (July 1994): 173–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/101053959400700305.

Full text

Abstract:

A preliminary developmental survey (using DDST) of 1442 Bangkok children who were between the ages of two weeks and six years was conducted between June 1983 and December 1987. The results of this study showed that the 25th percentile for the development of Bangkok children in the areas of personal-social, fine motor adaptive, language and gross motor skills were comparable to the children in original samples in Denver. Although the Bangkok group seems to have passed many test items at earlier ages, the 75th-90th percentile in each test item was generally more delayed in the Bangkok group. The investigative team suggests that further research for the purpose of establishing a norm for the DDST be pursued on the basis of geographical sampling more than socioeconomical sampling that was used in this study. Asia Pac J Public Health 1994;7(3):173-7.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Koesnandar, Effie, Soedjatmiko Soedjatmiko, and Pustika Amalia. "Parents Evaluation of Developmental Status and Denver Developmental Screening Test II in high risk infant and toddler." Paediatrica Indonesiana 50, no. 1 (August 15, 2016): 26. http://dx.doi.org/10.14238/pi50.1.2010.26-30.

Full text

Abstract:

Background. Developmental screening is important particularly for high risk infants and toddlers. Parents Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS) and Denver Developmental Screening Test II (Denver II test) are recommended instruments with good sensitivity and specificity. Compared to Denver II test, PEDS is simpler, thus it is important to assess the agreement of PEDS and Denver II test.Objectives. To determine the prevalence of developmental disorder in high risk infants and toddlers and agreement of PEDS and Denver II test.Methods. Infants and toddlers registered at pediatric high risk clinic were recruited. PEDS questionnaire was answered by parents while the Denver II test performed by the investgator. Agreement of PEDS and Denver II instrument was assessed by Kappa score.Results. Out of 71 subjects, 41 (58%) were male, 43 (61%) were >12 months old, 35 (49%) were undernourished, 42 (59%) were preterm (<37 week gestational age), and 43 (60.6%) were low birth weight (LBW). The prevalence of developmental disorder was higher in subjects >12 months old (42%), undernourished (49%), preterm (48%), and LBW (47%). The prevalence of developmental disorder was 49% by PEDS and 39% by Denver II test. Agreement of PEDS and Denver II test was good with Kappa score 0.52, particularly for gross motor and language domain.Conclusions. The prevalence of developmental disorder is higher in high risk infant and toddler, who >12 months old, undernourished, premature, and LBW. PEDS instrument are equivalent to Denver II test, shows good agreement, particularly for gross motor and language domain. [Paediatr Indones. 2010;50:26-30].

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

GLASCOE, FRANCES PAGE, and KAREN E. BYRNE. "Is the Denver II Developmental Test Worthwhile?" Pediatrics 90, no. 6 (December 1, 1992): 1010–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.90.6.1010.

Full text

Abstract:

In Reply.— We thank Dr Adesman for his timely and insightful comments regarding our research on the Denver II and Dr Dworkin for his accompanying commentary. Our findings, and Dr Adesman's comments, illustrate why it is important for authors to validate their measures prior to publication, whether their instruments are developmental checklists or screening tests. Validation is proof that instruments assess important rather than insignificant aspects of development. Validation enables authors to remove items which fail to concur with diagnostic measures and add items which best predict performance criteria (eg, successful demonstration of kindergarten readiness skills).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Williams, Phoebe Danz, and Arthur Ross Williams. "Denver Developmental Screening Test Norms: A Cross-Cultural Comparison." Journal of Pediatric Psychology 12, no. 1 (1987): 39–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/12.1.39.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

JOHNSON, KATHERINE L., LINDA G. ASHFORD, KAREN E. BYRNE, and FRANCES PAGE GLASCOE. "Does Denver II Produce Meaningful Results?" Pediatrics 90, no. 3 (September 1, 1992): 477–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.90.3.477.

Full text

Abstract:

To the Editor.— We commend Frankenburg et al for their efforts to revise the Denver Developmental Screening Test.1 The authors have wisely incorporated suggestions from many researchers who conducted validity studies on older versions of the measure.2-5 As a consequence, the Denver II appears to be substantially improved, particularly in its measurement of language. This is quite important because the more prevalent developmental disabilities share language deficits as a common characteristic. Yet despite its manny improvements, the Dennver II is clearly unnfinished adn unready for marketing.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Frankenburg, William K., Josiah Dodds, Philip Archer, Howard Shapiro, and Beverly Bresnick. "The Denver II: A Major Revision and Restandardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test." Pediatrics 89, no. 1 (January 1, 1992): 91–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.89.1.91.

Full text

Abstract:

Since the Denver Developmental Screening Test was first published 23 years ago, it has been utilized worldwide and restandardized in more than a dozen countries. Concerns raised through the years by test users about specific items and features of the Denver Developmental Screening Test, coupled with a need for more current norms, have prompted a major revision and restandardization of the test. For the revision, 336 potential items were administered to more than 2000 children. The average number of times each item was administered was 540. Using regression analysis, composite norms for the total sample and norms for subgroups (based on gender, ethnicity, maternal education, and place of residence), were used to determine new age norms. The final selection of the 125 Denver II items was based on the following criteria: ease of administration and scoring, item appeal to child and examiner, item test-retest and inter-rater reliability, minimal "refusal" scores, minimal "no opportunity" scores, minimal subgroup differences, and a smooth step-like progression of ages at which 90% of children could perform the tasks. The major differences between the Denver II and the Denver Developmental Screening Test are: 1) an 86% increase in language items; 2) two articulation items; 3) a new age scale; 4) a new category of item interpretation to identify milder delays; 6) a behavior rating scale; and 7) new training materials.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Glascoe, Frances Page, Karen E. Byrne, Linda G. Ashford, Katherine L. Johnson, Bernard Chang, and Bryan Strickland. "Accuracy of the Denver-II in Developmental Screening." Pediatrics 89, no. 6 (June 1, 1992): 1221–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.89.6.1221.

Full text

Abstract:

One of the oldest and best known developmental screening tests was recently restandardized and revised as the Denver-II. Because it was published without evidence of its accuracy, the present study was undertaken with 104 children between 3 and 72 months of age attending one of five day-care centers. To determine the presence of developmental problems, children were administered individual measures of intelligence, speech-language, achievement, and adaptive behavior. A second psychological examiner, blind to the outcome of the diagnostic battery, administered the Denver-II. Developmental problems including language impairments, learning disabilities, mild mental retardation, and/or functional developmental delay were found in 17% of the children. The Denver-II identified correctly 83% and thus had high rates of sensitivity. However, more than half the children with normal development also received abnormal, questionable, or untestable Denver-II scores. Thus the test had limited specificity (43%) and a high overreferral rate. The alternative scoring method, categorizing questionable/untestable scores as normal, caused sensitivity to drop to 56% although specificity rose to 80%. Since neither scoring method produced acceptable levels of accuracy, an effort was made to locate the sources of accuracy and inaccuracy within the test. Only items in the language domain were modestly helpful in discriminating children with and without difficulties. The findings suggest that the authors of the Denver-II need to engage in further development of the instrument including revising scoring criteria and item placement in relation to children's ages. In the interim, test users should employ screening tests which are more accurate such as the Minnesota Inventories or the Battelle Developmental Inventory Screening Test.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Borowitz, Kathleen C., and Frances P. Glascoe. "Sensitivity of the Denver Developmental Screening Test in Speech and Language Screening." Pediatrics 78, no. 6 (December 1, 1986): 1075–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.78.6.1075.

Full text

Abstract:

A retrospective study was undertaken to determine whether the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) language sector is a sensitive screen of speech and language development. Seventy-one children between 18 and 66 months of age with suspected developmental problems were referred to screening clinics conducted by a child evaluation team. Each child was screened using the DDST (revised) and another screening measure of speech and language development. Statistically significant differences were found between the DDST language sector and the speech-language screening in identification of expressive language and articulation problems. No significant difference was found with receptive language. The DDST failed to identify more than one half of the children with expressive language and/or articulation problems. These results demonstrate that the DDST may fail to identify children with speech and language impairment. Professionals involved in developmental screening need to be advised of alternative speech and language screening measures.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Mustofa, Festy Ladyani, Arti Febriyani Hutasuhut, and Ajeng Larasati. "STATUS GIZI ANAK BERHUBUNGAN DENGAN COGNITIVE DAN BEHAVIOUR SESUAI DENVER DEVELOPMENTAL SCREENING TEST." Jurnal Kebidanan Malahayati 7, no. 2 (April 30, 2021): 347–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.33024/jkm.v7i2.4101.

Full text

Abstract:

RELATIONSHIP OF CHILDREN’S NUTRITIONAL STASTUS WITH COGNITIVE AND BEHAVIOURS ACCORDING TO DENVER DEVELOPMENTAL SCREENING TEST Background:One of the important factors that affect child development is nutrition. Lampung Province has a percentage of malnutrition of 1.6%, malnutrition of 12.4%. The results of the 2013 Riskesdas showed the prevalence of under-five nutritional status (BW / U) in Bandar Lampung City for 3.5% malnutrition, 12.3% under nutrition, 78.2% good nutrition and 5.9% over nutrition. Poor nutritional status in toddlers can have an effect that greatly hinders their physical, mental and thinking abilities which in turn will reduce the work ability of toddlers in their activities.Puprose of this study was to determine the relationship between children's nutritional status with cognitive and behavior according to the Denver Developmental Screening Test at TK An-Nur Sumber Rejo Kemiling, Bandar Lampung City in 2020. Methods The study used the Denver Developmental screening Test as a research instrument. The population in this study were students who attended Kindergarten An-Nur Sumber Rejo Kemiling, Bandar Lampung City. The sample in this study was a total population of 57 students. Researchers used data collection techniques or measuring instruments using the Denver Developmental Screening Test. Analysis of the relationship using the chi square test. Result The frequency distribution of respondents with normal nutritional status was 40 respondents (70.2%), respondents with normal cognitive and behavioral development were 36 respondents (63.2%). There is a relationship between children's nutritional status and cognitive and behavior according to the Denver Developmental Screening Test at Kindergarten An-Nur Sumber Rejo Kemiling, Bandar Lampung City in 2020 (p value 0.011). Conclusion there is a relationship between children's nutritional status and cognitive and behavior.Suggestion can improve Maternal and Children Health (MCH) services as well as services for infants under five to prevent the occurrence of malnutrition. In addition, early detection services for growth and development must be carried out more thoroughly Keywords: Child Nutritional Status, Cognitive and Behavior ABSTRAK Latar Belakang Salah satu faktor penting yang mempengaruhi tumbuh kembang anak adalah faktor gizi. Provinsi Lampung memeliki persentase gizi buruk sebesar 1,6%, gizi kurang sebesar 12,4%. Hasil Riskesdas tahun 2013 menunjukkan Prevalensi status gizi balita (BB/U) di Kota Bandar Lampung untuk gizi buruk 3.5%, gizi kurang 12.3%, gizi baik 78.2% dan gizi lebih 5.9%.Status gizi yang buruk pada balita dapat menimbulkan pengaruh yang sangat menghambat fisik, mental maupun kemampuan berfikir yang pada akhirnya akan menurunkan kemampuan kerja balita dalam aktivitasnya.Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui hubungan status gizi anak dengan cognitive dan behaviour sesuai Denver Developmental Screening Test di TK An-Nur Sumber Rejo Kemiling Kota Bandar Lampung tahun 2020.Metode penelitian kuantitatif dengan pendekatan cross sectional. Populasi murid yang bersekolah di TK An-Nur Sumber Rejo Kemiling Kota Bandar Lampung, Sampel total populasi sejumlah 57 siswa. Peneliti menggunakan teknik pengumpulan data atau alat ukur dengan menggunakan Denver Developmental Screening Test. Analisis hubungan menggunakan uji chi square.Hasil Penelitian menunjukkan distribusi frekuensi responden dengan status gizi normal, yaitu sebanyak 40 responden (70,2%), responden dengan Perkembangan Cognitive Dan Behaviour normal, yaitu sebanyak 36 responden (63,2%). Ada hubungan status gizi anak dengan cognitive dan behaviour sesuai Denver Developmental Screening Test di TK An-Nur Sumber Rejo Kemiling Kota Bandar Lampung Tahun 2020 (p value 0,011).Kesimpulan Ada hubungan status gizi anak dengan cognitive dan behaviour.Saran dapat meningkatkan pelayanan kesehatan ibu dan anak (KIA) serta pelayanan bayi balita untuk mencegah terjadinya kejadian gizi kurang. Selain itu pelayanan deteksi dini tumbuh kembang harus dilakukan dengan lebih teliti Kata Kunci : Status Gizi Anak, Cognitive Dan Behaviour

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Ueda, Reiko. "Standardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test on Tokyo Children." Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 20, no. 5 (November 12, 2008): 647–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1978.tb15284.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Bryant, Gillian M., Kathleen J. Davies, and Robert G. Newcombe. "Standardisation of the Denver Developmental Screening Test for Cardiff Children." Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 21, no. 3 (November 12, 2008): 353–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1979.tb01627.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Epir, Shirley, and Kalbiye Yalaz. "URBAN TURKISH CHILDREN'S PERFORMANCE ON THE DENVER DEVELOPMENTAL SCREENING TEST." Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 26, no. 5 (November 12, 2008): 632–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1984.tb04502.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

DWORKIN, PAUL H. "Developmental Screening—Expecting the Impossible?" Pediatrics 83, no. 4 (April 1, 1989): 619–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.83.4.619.

Full text

Abstract:

In this issue of Pediatrics, Meisels addresses a topic that has received considerable attention within the child development literature—the validity of the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST). The author summarizes data from 13 studies to document the limited sensitivity of the test. However, several of the studies cited by Meisels are themselves weakened by methodologic problems. For example, in four of the so-called replication studies, applications were actually examined for which the DDST was not originally designed, such as identifying developmental delay among biologically vulnerable infants, screening for speech and language problems, and identifying children with moderate to severe delays.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Jasri, Moh, and Abdul Karim. "IMPLEMENTASI METODE DENVER DEVELOPMENTAL SCREENING TEST UNTUK ANAMNESA PERKEMBAGAN ANAK PADA SISTEM PAKAR." Jurnal Aplikasi Teknologi Informasi dan Manajemen (JATIM) 1, no. 1 (April 28, 2020): 19–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.31102/jatim.v1i1.754.

Full text

Abstract:

Perkembangan anak tidak luput dari peran serta orang tua yang hakikatnya berkewajiban memberikan yang terbaik bagi perkembangan fisik maupun psikis anak. Nutrisi makanan dan lingkungan juga memegang peranan penting bagi tumbuh kembang anak, selain itu dibutuhkan instansi pendidikan Pra Sekolah yang dapat membantu tugas orang tua mengontrol dan memperhatikan perkembangan anak. Anamnesa (pemeriksaan subyekti) adalah salah satu cara pengumpulan data status pasien yang didapat dengan cara operator mengajukan pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang berhubungan dengan keadaan pasien (anak pra sekolah). Salah satu metode yang dapat digunakan untuk mengetahui gangguan perkembangan anak adalah Denver Developmental Screening Test. Denver Developmental Screening Test adalah salah satu dari metode skrining terhadap kelainan perkembangan anak, tes ini bukanlah tes diagnostic atau tes IQ. Denver Developmental Screening Test memenuhi semua persyaratan yang diperlukan untuk metode skrining yang baik. Tes ini mudah dan cepat (15-20 menit), dapat diandalakan dan menunjukkan validitas tinggi. Karena kebutuhan pelaksanaan test yang komplit kemudian metode ini dikembangkan dalam Sistem pakar yang dapat mewakili pakar mentransformasikan pengetahuannya. Sedangkan Forward Chaining adalah suatu metode dalam sistem pakar yaitu pencocokan fakta atau pernyataan dimulai dari bagian sebelah kiri (IF). Dengan kata lain, penalaran dimulai dari fakta terlebih dahulu untuk menguji kebenaran hipotesis. Dari hasil uji coba sistem didapatkan cara pelaksanaan test skrining yang lebih mudah, efektif dan efisien.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

SCIARILLO, WILLIAM G., MARY MARGARET BROWN, NANCY M. ROBINSON, FORREST C. BENNETT, and CLIFFORD J. SELLS. "Effectiveness of the Denver Developmental Screening Test with Biologically Vulnerable Infants." Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics 7, no. 2 (April 1986): 77–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004703-198604000-00002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Frankenburg, William K., Cynthia Y. Ker, Stephen Engelke, Earl S. Schaefer, and Susan M. Thornton. "Validation of key Denver Developmental Screening Test items: A preliminary study." Journal of Pediatrics 112, no. 4 (April 1988): 560–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3476(88)80167-7.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Greer, Steven, Howard Bauchner, and Barry Zuckerman. "THE DENVER DEVELOPMENTAL SCREENING TEST: HOW GOOD IS ITS PREDICTIVE VALIDITY?" Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 31, no. 6 (November 12, 2008): 774–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1989.tb04073.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Priambodo, Arief, Meita Dhamayanti, and Eddy Fadlyana. "Agreement between the Denver II and Parents’ Evaluation of Developmental Status tests, with and without the assistance of a table of categorical responses." Paediatrica Indonesiana 56, no. 5 (January 9, 2017): 267. http://dx.doi.org/10.14238/pi56.5.2016.267-71.

Full text

Abstract:

Background Among standardized developmental screening tools, the Denver II is commonly used by Indonesian pediatricians, but the Parent’s Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS) test has gained in popularity. The Denver II test is filled by physicians, while the PEDS test is meant to be filled by parents. From a practical standpoint, however, parents often require assistance from doctors when filling out the PEDS forms. Hence, the advantage of the PEDS test over the Denver II test is not fully realized.Objective To compare the agreement between Denver II and PEDS tests, with and without parental use of a table of categorical responses taken from the PEDS manual.Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study in children aged 6 months to 5 years in Bandung from November 2015 to March 2016. Subjects were divided into two groups using block randomization. One group of subjects’ parents filled the PEDS questionnaires with the assistance of a table of categorical responses taken from the PEDS manual, while the other group of subjects’ parents filled PEDS forms without this table. All subjects underwent Denver II screening by pediatricans. The agreement between the PEDS and Denver II results were assessed by Kappa score.Results Of 254 children, 239 were analyzed. Kappa scores between the Denver II and PEDS tests were 0.05 (95%CI: -0.10 to 0.20) without the table of categorical responses, and -0.06 (-0.23 to 0.10) with the table of categorical responses.Conclusion Agreement between the Denver II and PEDS tests is poor. The table of categorical responses does not increase the agreement between Denver II and PEDS.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Feeney, Jennifer, and John Bernthal. "The Efficiency of the Revised Denver Developmental Screening Test as a Language Screening Tool." Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 27, no. 4 (October 1996): 330–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461.2704.330.

Full text

Abstract:

The purpose of this study was to determine the number of false positives and false negatives derived from the language domain of the Revised Denver Developmental Screening Test (RDDST) in a community preschool screening. Six months after the initial screening, 199 RDDST protocols were reviewed and the status of each child was documented. The study identified nine false positives and three false negatives, which resulted in a positive hit rate of 93.5 %. The results of the study indicate that the RDDST is an effective tool in predicting the need for formal assessment.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

DWORKIN, PAUL H. "Developmental Screening: (Still) Expecting the Impossible?" Pediatrics 89, no. 6 (June 1, 1992): 1253–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.89.6.1253.

Full text

Abstract:

The widespread popularity of the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) during the past 25 years has been accompanied by considerable scrutiny. Certain criticisms, such as the lack of updated norms, the limited extent to which norms may apply to groups such as disadvantaged children, and the difficulty in administering some items, appear justified.1 However, a number of studies critical of the DDST examine applications beyond the intended purpose of this instrument, such as identifying developmental delay among biologically vulnerable infants, screening for speech and language problems, and identifying children with moderate to severe delays.2 The inaccurate or inappropriate way in which the test has been administered and interpreted has troubled the test's developers.3

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Frankenburg, William K. "Preventing Developmental Delays: Is Developmental Screening Sufficient?" Pediatrics 93, no. 4 (April 1, 1994): 586–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.93.4.586.

Full text

Abstract:

Developmental screening, a secondary form of prevention, is designed to facilitate early identification and treatment of children in whom a developmental problem has been diagnosed. Ideally, this is accomplished through the administration of a quick, simple, economical procedure that is designed to identify children having a high probability of being delayed. Unfortunately, no single, brief developmental screening test exists that has equal accuracy in identifying the wide gamut of developmental problems in areas such as cognition, language, speech, motor, and social development. In addition, the child's changing development over time limits the predictive accuracy of any such test. Despite these limitations, developmental screening, like a growth measurement, has value as an aide in developmental surveillance, because it enables its user to combine its results with those of parent concerns, child observations, immunizations, and anticipatory guidance to promote the child's development. This process, rather than waiting for the child to be deviant, is a primary prevention approach that aims to assure that every child receiving such surveillance develops to his or her maximum potential. The DENVER II is designed to assist in this program.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Meisels, Samuel J. "Can Developmental Screening Tests Identify Children Who Are Developmentally at Risk?" Pediatrics 83, no. 4 (April 1, 1989): 578–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.83.4.578.

Full text

Abstract:

Developmental screening tests are in widespread use, but few reliable and valid tests are available. The most frequently used screening instrument for detecting young children who are at risk for developmental delays is the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST). Although the DDST has excellent test specificity, overreferring few children, results from more than a dozen studies of the DDST's concurrent and predictive validity fail to replicate the original validation and demonstrate a uniformly poor sensitivity, ie, a high proportion of underreferrals. Whether samples are stratified by age, risk, duration of time between predictor and outcome, or type of outcome measure used, these studies demonstrate that the DDST underrefers children at nearly a 2:1 ratio. Several other screening tests with more optimal psychometric properties are presented. It is urged that caution be exercised in using tests for predicting the risk of developmental problems in young children unless the tests have acceptable levels of sensitivity and specificity.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Mello, Paulo Roberto Bezerra de, Claudia de Souza Ozores Caldas, Sandra Coenga de Souza, and Ageo Mário Cândido da Silva. "The agreement between two screening tests for language evaluation in premature and low weight children." Revista Brasileira de Saúde Materno Infantil 16, no. 3 (September 2016): 295–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-93042016000300005.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Objectives: to evaluate the agreement of the results in two screening tests on children's development - Denver II and Early Language Milestone Scale (ELM) aged two to three years old, born prematurely and with low weight. Methods: two screening instruments: Denver II and ELM were applied for the development in an observational cross-sectional descriptive study. The agreement between Denver II Test and its language sector and ELM were assessed by Kappa coefficient. Results: 77 children evaluated, 36.3% had an overall loss of the development performed by Denver II and 32.5% loss of the language by ELM. The agreement between the results of Denver II test considering all sectors versus ELM showed Kappa coefficient of 0.856 (p<0.001) and considering only the language sector of Denver II versus ELM, the Kappa coefficient was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusions: the developmental impairment observed in the children studied by assessing Denver II and through its language sector showed agreement with changes in the language abilities observed in ELM.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

FRANKENBURG, WILLIAM K. "Psychosocial Screening." Pediatrics 80, no. 2 (August 1, 1987): 302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.80.2.302.

Full text

Abstract:

To the Editor.— The study by Borowitz and Glascoe (Pediatrics 1986;78:1075-1078) reported on the sensitivity of the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST). Although more studies validating psychosocial screening tests are needed to determine the efficacy of such tests, the study by Borowitz and Glascoe was misleading for two major reasons. First, the authors did not interpret the DDST in the prescribed manner. They stated, "Standard administration and scoring of the DDST were used, resulting in a pass, fail, or questionable score for each of the four sectors of the test.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Jaffe, M., J. Harel, A. Goldberg, M. Rudolph-Schnitzer, and S. T. Winter. "The Use of the Denver Developmental Screening Test in Infant Welfare Clinics." Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 22, no. 1 (November 12, 2008): 55–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1980.tb04305.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

CUNNINGHAM, ROBERT DANA. "Judging the Validity of Developmental Screening Tests." Pediatrics 87, no. 3 (March 1, 1991): 416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.87.3.416.

Full text

Abstract:

To the Editor.— In judging the validity of developmental screening tests, there is frequent difficulty in obtaining the ideal "gold standard" by which to judge the screening instrument. For example, while it is useful to know how the Denver Developmental Screening Test compares with the Stanford-Binet when attempting to identify children with mental retardation at 3 years of age, perhaps it is even more useful to know how the screening test compares with the Stanford-Binet in predicting which 3 year olds will go on to become labeled as mentally retarded at 6 years of age, a time when IQ scores are more stable and school systems are more likely to make special services available.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Bryant, Gillian M., Kathleen J. Davies, and Robert G. Newcombe. "The Denver Developmental Screening Test. Achievement of Test Items in the First Year of Life by Denver and Cardiff Infants." Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 16, no. 4 (November 12, 2008): 475–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1974.tb03372.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

BOROWITZ, KATHLEEN, and FRANCES P. GLASCOE. "Psychosocial Screening." Pediatrics 80, no. 2 (August 1, 1987): 302–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.80.2.302a.

Full text

Abstract:

In Reply.— Dr Frankenburg has raised a number of interesting points. Initially, he addresses concern about the use of "questionable" scores for individual sectors of the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST). Although we understand that the DDST should not be scored by individual sectors, to obtain a total test result each sector must be scored. On page 26 in the DDST manual/workbook currently distributed, a questionable score results with the following circumstances: "1 or more sectors with 1 delay and in that same sector no passes intersect the age line" (underline appears in manual).1

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Dewangan, Mithlesh, and Prateek Sharma. "Comparison of Trivandrum developmental screening charts against the standard Denver development screening test in children between 0-3 years." International Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics 7, no. 11 (October 21, 2020): 2142. http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2349-3291.ijcp20204538.

Full text

Abstract:

Background: To compare of DDST II and TDSC in the age group of 0-3 years and to assess developmental delay at various age groups using TDSC. Methods: 400 children were tested in their performance in the two tests since birth till 3 year of and their results were compared.Results: TDSC has sensitivity of 66.66% and specificity of 98.93% in screening for developmental delays. Positive predictive value for TDSC came out to be 100.00% and Negative predictive value for TDSC came out to be 97.20 %. Prevalence rate of developmental delay was 11.25%.Conclusions: Denver II test was concluded to be more sensitive test and TDSC as a more specific test.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Sembiring, Meriah, Iskandar Iskandar, Amir Syarifuddin, and Bistok Saing. "Denver Developmental Screening Test in two-year old infants delivered by vacuum extraction." Paediatrica Indonesiana 41, no. 1 (February 8, 2017): 27. http://dx.doi.org/10.14238/pi41.1.2001.27-32.

Full text

Abstract:

The aim of this study was to determine the developmental retardation of infants of two years of age who were delivered by vacuum extraction. This cross-sectional study examined 44 infants delivered by vacuum extraction, comprising 25 males and 19 females who were born in Tembakau Deli and St. Elizabeth Hospitals, between August 1993 until February 1994. The examination included interview and physical examination in the patient's house. Chi-square statistics analysis was used with a significant level of 95% (1'=0.05). The results showed Ihat of the 44 infants delivered by vacuum extraction. 28 (32%) had had were found with mild asphyxia, while 2 infants (5%). whose mothers work as private clerk and entrepreneur, had development retardation. We concluded that there was no significant difference in development between infants delivered by vacuum extraction and those who were born spontaneously. Developmental retardation was found in infants whose mothers lack time to communicate.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Glascoe, Frances P., and Kathleen C. Borowitz. "Improving the Sensitivity of the Language Sector of the Denver Developmental Screening Test." Diagnostique 13, no. 2-4 (January 1988): 76–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/153450848801300403.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Wijedasa, D. "Developmental screening in context: adaptation and standardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test-II (DDST-II) for Sri Lankan children." Child: Care, Health and Development 38, no. 6 (October 21, 2011): 889–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2011.01332.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Hamdanesti, Rischa, and Syalvia Oresti. "The Effectiveness of Comparison of the Use of the Kuesioner Pra Skrining Perkembangan (KPSP) with Denver II on Development Children aged 0 – 72 months in the Dadok Primary Health Center Work Padang." Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Keperawatan Indonesia 11, no. 04 (December 28, 2021): 207–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.33221/jiiki.v11i04.1532.

Full text

Abstract:

Background: The issues of toddler boom and improvement that want for use as a reference withinside the detection encompass 10% of youngsters reaching early age abilities, 50% of youngsters will attain their abilities, 75% of youngsters will gain extra abilities, 90% of youngsters could have on the way to attain the age restriction on the present-day still. However, some time ago, they encountered several growth and development problems which were quite worrying for preschool children. Objectives: This study was to determine the accuracy of developmental outcomes for children aged 0 – 72 months between the Guide to the Kuesioner Pra Skrining Perkembangan (KPSP) and the Denver Developmental Screening Test II (Denver II). Questioner Pra Skrining Perkembangan (KPSP) and the Denver Developmental Screening Test II (Denver II) have a good result, valid and reliable to view developmental outcomes for children aged 0 – 72 months in Dadok Primary Health Center. Methods: The research method used is analytic with the design used being cross-sectional, then the Cohen's Kappa coefficient statistical test is carried out. The research sampling technique used purposive sampling as many as 56 children aged 0-72 months with exclusion criteria, namely children who were sick, had physical disabilities, and experienced other developmental disorders that could not be measured with the KPSP and Denver II instruments. The research into finished from December 2020 to December 2021. Results: The effects of this examination discovered that the improvement of youngsters elderly 0-72 months turned into nevertheless in the precise or everyday category. This may be visible from the effects of developmental tests on the usage of the KPSP and Denver II instruments, each of that has equal effectiveness for use in assessing improvement in youngsters. This is evidenced by the results of the Cohen's Kappa coefficient statistical test with a Kappa value of 0.638 which means it is good (0.61-0.80). Conclusion: It is expected for parents to implement an early detection program for child development by the child's ability at home. Parents are expected to attend seminars or training on growth and development according to the child's age level. invite the child to be more diligent in moving, provide stimulation to the leg muscles, or take the child to therapy so that it can be handled properly.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

GARGAS, DONALD C. "Preparing Residents for the Doctor Denver." Pediatrics 80, no. 5 (November 1, 1987): 736–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.80.5.736.

Full text

Abstract:

At 10 weeks she could grasp a rattle, at 6 months she imitated speech sounds, and at 2 years she pedaled her first tricycle. She had aced the Denver Developmental Screening Test. Now, at age 30 years, she is about to face yet another growth and development hurdle: The Doctor Denver. Will she ace it again? Or could there be a "delay"? She is verbal, assertive, confident, current, and highly skilled. The newly trained, board-eligible physician represents high-tech, state-of-the-art medicine. But how well prepared, as a person, is the young physician to make the critical transition from university medicine to community practice?

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

FRANKENBURG, WILLIAM K. "Early Language Milestone Scale and Language Screening." Pediatrics 84, no. 3 (September 1, 1989): 586–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.84.3.586.

Full text

Abstract:

Walker et al made a contribution by calling attention to the importance of validation of screening tests in their article. However, the paper had three major shortcomings. First, the authors inappropriately cite a limitation of the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) based on a report by Borowitz and Glascoe. The Borowitz-Glascoe study has three major methodologic biases that invalidate its conclusions: One is failure to interpret the DDST in the prescribed manner—the authors wrongly compared their criterion tests with only one sector of the DDST.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Ga, Hyo-yun, and Jeong Yi Kwon. "A Comparison of the Korean-Ages and Stages Questionnaires and Denver Developmental Delay Screening Test." Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine 35, no. 3 (2011): 369. http://dx.doi.org/10.5535/arm.2011.35.3.369.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

WALKER, DEWEY D., SUSAN GUGENHEIM, MARION DOWNS, and JERRY L. NORTHERN. "In Reply: Early Language Milestone Scale and Language Screening." Pediatrics 84, no. 3 (September 1, 1989): 587. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.84.3.587.

Full text

Abstract:

We welcome a critique from our Denver friend and colleague, with his long experience in validating screening tests. No criticism of the DDST as a developmental screen was intended in our article. We merely wanted to make the point Dr Frankenburg himself has so succinctly stated that "outcome measures . . . such as syntax and articulation problems, are not even ascertained with the DDST test. . . ." The justification for our proposal that a language screening test like the ELM be used is, indeed, that the DDST is not a comprehensive language screen, as Dr Frankenburg concedes.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Powers, Stephen, Ricardo Duran, and Anne Reynolds. "Family Characteristics and Preschool Abilities of Children of Substance Abusers." Perceptual and Motor Skills 76, no. 3 (June 1993): 912–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pms.1993.76.3.912.

Full text

Abstract:

Intercorrelations among subtest scores of 39 children on the subtests of the Denver Developmental Screening Test II and their 39 parents' scores on the three subscales of the Family Relationship Dimension of the Family Environment Scale ranged from − .09 to .18. None were statistically significant. Parents and children were in a program for substance abusers and their young children.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Albuquerque, Karolina Alves de, and Ana Cristina Barros da Cunha. "New trends in instruments for child development screening in Brazil: a systematic review." Journal of Human Growth and Development 30, no. 2 (June 17, 2020): 188–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.v30.10366.

Full text

Abstract:

Introduction: Screening instruments are widely used to monitor child development. The accurate use of standardized tools is an indispensable condition for clinical practice and research aimed at detecting developmental risks and other problems in children. Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to analyze the use of standardized tools for child development screening used in studies with Brazilian children. Methods: Two independent researchers selected references in English and Portuguese from five databases through which they searched for studies that used screening tests to assess the development of Brazilian children. All articles were read to determine the main objective, design, target population, the type of screening test, and the purpose of using the test with Brazilian children. Results: Among the 27 papers analyzed, most of them was observational studies conducted with children up to six years of age, with the main objective to screen development delays and analyze associations between risks and child development. Four instruments were identified: Denver Developmental Screening Test II, Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development Screening Test, and Battelle Developmental Inventory Screening Test. Three of these tests have been validated for use in Brazil. Conclusion: This review suggests that the screening instruments have been used in research for different purposes, such as in the diagnosis of developmental problems, and sometimes inappropriately. Furthermore, studies to validate measures for screening and assessing the development of Brazilian children are still scarce and, therefore, deserve more attention.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Diamond, Karen E. "Effectiveness of the Revised Denver Developmental Screening Test in Identifying Children at Risk for Learning Problems." Journal of Educational Research 83, no. 3 (January 1990): 152–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1990.10885947.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Bryant, Gillian M., Kathleen J. Davies, F. Marie Richards, and Susan Voorhees. "A Preliminary Study of the Use of the Denver Developmental Screening Test in a Health Department." Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 15, no. 1 (November 12, 2008): 33–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1973.tb04863.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

De-Andrés-Beltrán, Beatriz, Ángel L. Rodríguez-Fernández, Javier Güeita-Rodríguez, and Johan Lambeck. "Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Denver Developmental Screening Test II." European Journal of Pediatrics 174, no. 3 (August 28, 2014): 325–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00431-014-2410-7.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Rehana, Rehana, Jawiah Jawiah, Maliha Amin, and Ari Athiutama. "PELATIHAN SKRINING PERKEMBANGAN ANAK PADA GURU DAN WALI MURID DENGAN DENVER DEVELOPMENTAL SCREENING TEST II (DDST II)." Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Borneo 6, no. 2 (August 31, 2022): 123–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.35334/jpmb.v6i2.2564.

Full text

Abstract:

Perkembangan sangat penting dalam kehidupan manusia khususnya bagi anak. Berdasarkan data BPS menunjukkan bahwa 30,1% penduduk indonesia adalah anak-anak, untuk itu perlu memberikan perhatian khusus pada anak-anak dalam menilai perkembangannya. Pengabdian kepada masyarakat ini bertujuan untuk pemberdayaan guru dan wali murid mengenai cara penilaian perkembangan anak, pengukuran tingkat perkembangan anak usia dini dan meningkatkan kapasitas guru dan wali murid, sehingga mempunyai keterampilan dalam melakukan skrining terhadap perkembangan anak dengan menggunakan Denver Developmental Screening Test II (DDST II). Mitra dalam pengabdian kepada masyarakat ini adalah guru dan wali murid. Metode pada pengabdian kepada masyarakat ini yaitu penyegaran tumbuh kembang anak dan stimulasinya, pemberian pelatihan skrining perkembangan anak dengan form DDST II dan pendampingan pelaksanaan skrining. Hasil yang didapat setiap kelompok memiliki kemampuan dalam skrining perkembangan anak. Dengan adanya pelatihan skrining dengan menggunakan DDST II ini, guru dan wali murid dapat memantau perkembangan anak, sehingga bila terdapat kelainan dapat terdeteksi secara dini.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Caldas, Claudia de Souza Ozores, Olga Akiko Takano, Paulo Roberto Bezerra de Mello, Sandra Coenga de Souza, and Arturo Alejandro Zavala Zavala. "Desempenho nas habilidades da linguagem em crianças nascidas prematuras e com baixo peso e fatores associados." Audiology - Communication Research 19, no. 2 (April 2014): 158–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s2317-64312014000200010.

Full text

Abstract:

Objetivo: Analisar as habilidades do desenvolvimento da linguagem em crianças de 2 a 3 anos de idade, nascidas prematuras e com baixo peso e os fatores de risco associados. Métodos Estudo transversal com aplicação do teste de Denver II (Denver Developmental Screening Test) e escala ELM (Early Language Milestone Scale). Foi utilizado o teste de Qui-quadrado e todas variáveis com p<0,20 entraram no modelo de regressão logística binária, nível de significância (p<0,05). Resultados: Das 77 crianças avaliadas, 36,4% apresentaram desempenho global alterado no teste de Denver II, considerando os quatro setores, e 37,6% apresentaram cautelas e atrasos no setor da linguagem, especificamente na avaliação da habilidade de linguagem pela escala ELM, 32,5% das crianças apresentaram alterações. O desempenho alterado, considerando os quatro setores do teste de Denver II e da linguagem na escala ELM, após regressão logística, permaneceu associado com: suspeita dos pais de alterações no desenvolvimento (Denver II e ELM); peso <1500 g e cesariana (Denver II somente); hemorragia intracraniana e renda familiar mensal per capita ≤1/2 salário mínimo (ELM somente). Conclusão Crianças nascidas prematuras e com baixo peso apresentaram atraso na aquisição de habilidades no desenvolvimento da linguagem, com maior comprometimento da função auditiva expressiva, associado a fatores de risco socioeconômicos e de histórico.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!