Adaptation of the INTERGROWTH-21st neurodevelopment assessment (INTER-NDA) to the context of the English-speaking Caribbean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adaptation of standardized early child development (ECD) assessments to low- and middle-income countries can be challenging because of culture-specific factors relating to language, content, context, and tool administration, and because the reliance of these tests on specialist healthcare professionals limits their scalability in low resource settings. METHODS: We report the cross-cultural adaptation of an international, standardized ECD instrument, the INTERGROWTH-21st Project Neurodevelopment Assessment (INTER-NDA), measuring cognitive, language, motor and behavioural outcomes in 2-year-olds, from a UK-based English-speaking population to the English-speaking Caribbean. Children aged 22-30 months were recruited from a pre-existing randomized controlled neurodevelopment intervention study in Grenada, West Indies. RESULTS: Eight of 37 INTER-NDA items (22%) were culturally and linguistically adapted for implementation in the Caribbean context. Protocol adherence across seven newly-trained non-specialist child development assessors was 89.9%; six of the seven assessors scored ≥80%. Agreement between the expert assessor and the non-specialist child development assessors was substantial (κ = 0.89 to 1.00 (95% CI [0.58, 1.00]). The inter-rater and test-retest reliability for non-specialist child development assessors was between κ = 0.99 -1.00 (95% CI [0.98, 0.99]) and κ = 0.76 - 1.00 (95% CI [0.33, 1.00]) across all INTER-NDA domains. CONCLUSIONS: The current study provides evidence to support the use of the adapted INTER-NDA by trained, non-specialist assessors to measure ECD prevalence in the English-speaking Caribbean. It also provides a methodological template for the adaptation of child developmental measures to cultural and linguistic contexts that conform to the cultural standards of the countries in which they are utilized to aid in the measurement of neurodevelopmental impairments (NDIs) in a variety of global clinical settings.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".