Separate norms were provided for the 16 items whose scores varied by race, maternal education, or rural-urban residence.Interpretation The author of the test, William K.
Significant differences were defined as differences of more than 10% in the age at which 90% of children could perform any given item. However, the authors found no clinically significant differences when results were weighted to reflect the distribution of demographic factors in the whole U.S. The test has been criticized because that population is slightly different from that of the U.S. (Positive predictive value meant the probability that a child with a suspect Denver II would be diagnosed as abnormal when evaluated negative predictive value meant the probability that a child with a normal Denver II would be diagnosed as normal when evaluated.)A study of 3389 children under five in Brazil has produced a continuous measure of child development for population studies. The authors concluded that in their program a suspect Denver II should usually result in referral. The authors concluded that a suspect Denver II “should lead to careful monitoring and rescreening unless provider or parental concern suggests the need for immediate referral.” Among children 18–72 months old, the prevalence of abnormality was 0.43 and the positive predictive value of the Denver II was 0.77, negative predictive value of 0.89, sensitivity 0.86, and specificity of 0.81. In children under 18 months the prevalence of abnormality was 0.19 on diagnostic tests, and the Denver II had a positive predictive value of 0.36, a negative predictive value of 0.90, a sensitivity of 0.67, and a specificity of 0.72. However, their results should be combined with attention to parental concerns and the pediatrician’s opinion, rather than replacing them, to augment the screening process and increase identification of children with ”. The chairman of the committee wrote: “In the practice of developmental screening and surveillance, we recommend the incorporation of parent-completed questionnaires or directly administered screening tests into the process of surveillance and screening.
This list includes the DENVER II among its choices. Frankenburg did not recommend criteria for referral rather, he recommended that screening programs and communities review their results and decide whether they are satisfied.In 2006 the American Academy of Pediatrics Council on Children with Disabilities Section on Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics published a list of screening tests for clinicians to consider when selecting a test to use in their practice. Such factors could include the parents’ education and opinions, the child’s health, family history, and available services. Frankenburg, likened it to a of height and weight and encouraged users to consider factors other than test results in working with an individual child.
0 kommentar(er)
