MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006224684 · doi:10.1111/dmcn.14480

Validity of the Ages and Stages Questionnaire to identify young children with gross motor difficulties who require physiotherapy assessment

2020· article· en· W3006224684 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John R Fauls, Bronwyn Lennox Thompson, Leanne M. Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Medicine & Child Neurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGross motor skillRank correlationSpearman's rank correlation coefficientMotor skillContingency tablePhysical therapyMedicinePsychologyPediatricsDevelopmental psychologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To determine if the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition Gross Motor domain (ASQ-3-GM) score is predictive of motor performance on the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and/or Neurological, Sensory, Motor, Developmental Assessment (NSMDA). METHOD: This was a cross-sectional study involving analysis of a 1-year consecutive clinical sample of data obtained from children attending a specialist public outpatient service. Participants were 84 children aged 0 to 5 years (mean age 24.9mo, SD 18.4mo; 50 males, 34 females) referred for physiotherapy assessment of gross motor skills in a tertiary child development service. Parents completed the ASQ-3 questionnaire and children were assessed using the AIMS (if aged 0-18mo) and/or NSMDA (all children). To determine possible relationships between ASQ-3-GM scores with AIMS and NSMDA scores, we calculated Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. To determine validity of the ASQ-3-GM 'refer for further assessment' ('refer') cut-off score to identify gross motor difficulties we calculated frequency distributions and crosstab analyses. RESULTS: ASQ-3-GM scores correlated with AIMS centile rank (r=0.697, p<0.001) and NSMDA motor performance classification (r=-0.548, p<0.001). The ASQ-3-GM 'refer' cut-off had 77% sensitivity, 91% specificity, and 95% positive predictive value (PPV) to identify children that scored ≤10th centile on the AIMS and 57% sensitivity, 92% specificity, and 97% PPV to identify children with at least minimal dysfunction on the NSMDA. INTERPRETATION: The ASQ-3-GM 'refer' cut-off score is a valid predictor of gross motor difficulties in young children. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: The Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition Gross Motor domain (ASQ-3-GM) score is valid to identify gross motor difficulties in young children. The ASQ-3-GM 'refer' cut-off had 95% positive predictive value (PPV) for children that scored ≤10th centile on the Alberta Infant Motor Scale. The ASQ-3-GM 'refer' cut-off had 97% PPV for at least minimal dysfunction on the Neurological, Sensory, Motor, Developmental Assessment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.797

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental Medicine & Child NeurologySame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207