The Malawi Developmental Assessment Tool (MDAT): The Creation, Validation, and Reliability of a Tool to Assess Child Development in Rural African Settings

English version České info

Background:
Although 80% of children with disabilities live in developing countries, there are few culturally appropriate developmental assessment tools available for these settings. Often tools from the West provide misleading findings in different cultural settings, where some items are unfamiliar and reference values are different from those of Western populations.

Methods and Findings:
Following preliminary and qualitative studies, we produced a draft developmental assessment tool with 162 items in four domains of development. After face and content validity testing and piloting, we expanded the draft tool to 185 items. We then assessed 1,426 normal rural children aged 0–6 y from rural Malawi and derived age-standardized norms for all items. We examined performance of items using logistic regression and reliability using kappa statistics. We then considered all items at a consensus meeting and removed those performing badly and those that were unnecessary or difficult to administer, leaving 136 items in the final Malawi Developmental Assessment Tool (MDAT). We validated the tool by comparing age-matched normal children with those with malnutrition (120) and neurodisabilities (80). Reliability was good for items remaining with 94%–100% of items scoring kappas >0.4 for interobserver immediate, delayed, and intra-observer testing. We demonstrated significant differences in overall mean scores (and individual domain scores) for children with neurodisabilities (35 versus 99 [p<0.001]) when compared to normal children. Using a pass/fail technique similar to the Denver II, 3% of children with neurodisabilities passed in comparison to 82% of normal children, demonstrating good sensitivity (97%) and specificity (82%). Overall mean scores of children with malnutrition (weight for height <80%) were also significantly different from scores of normal controls (62.5 versus 77.4 [p<0.001]); scores in the separate domains, excluding social development, also differed between malnourished children and controls. In terms of pass/fail, 28% of malnourished children versus 94% of controls passed the test overall.

Conclusions:
A culturally relevant developmental assessment tool, the MDAT, has been created for use in African settings and shows good reliability, validity, and sensitivity for identification of children with neurodisabilities.

: Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Vyšlo v časopise: The Malawi Developmental Assessment Tool (MDAT): The Creation, Validation, and Reliability of a Tool to Assess Child Development in Rural African Settings. PLoS Med 7(5): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000273
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000273

Souhrn

Zdroje

1. Grantham-McGregorS

CheungYB

CuetoS

GlewweP

RichterL

2007 Child development in developing countries 1: developmental potential in the first 5 years for children in developing countries. Lancet 369 60 70

2. EnglePL

BlackMM

BehrmanJR

Cabral de MelloM

GertlerPJ

2007 Strategies to avoid the loss of developmental potential in more than 200 million children in the developing world. Lancet 369 229 242

3. Grantham-McGregorSM

AniC

2001 A review of studies on the effect of iron deficiency on cognitive development in children. J Nutr 131 649S 668S

4. BoivinMJ

GreenSD

DaviesAG

GiordaniB

MokiliJK

1995 A preliminary evaluation of the cognitive and motor effects of pediatric HIV infection in Zairian children. Health Psychol 14 13 21

5. DrotarD

OlnessK

WiznitzerM

SchatschneiderC

MarumL

1999 Neurodevelopmental outcomes of Ugandan infants with HIV infection: an application of growth curve analysis. Health Psychol 18 114 121

6. HoldingPA

TaylorHG

KazunguSD

MkalaT

GonaJ

2004 Assessing cognitive outcomes in a rural African population: development of a neuropsychological battery in Kilifi District, Kenya. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 10 246 260

7. GeisingerK

2006 Cross-cultural normative assessment: translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychol Assess 6 304 312

8. AinaOF

MorakinyoO

2005 Normative data on mental and motor development in Nigerian children. West Afr J Med 24 151 156

9. RichterLM

GrieselR

RoseC

1992 The Bayley scales of infant development: a South African standardization. South African Journal of Occupational Therapy 22 14 25

10. AbubakarA

HoldingPA

Van BaarA

NewtonCRJC

Van de VijverFJR

2008 Monitoring psychomotor development in a resource limited setting: an evaluation of the Kilifi Developmental Inventory. Ann Trop Paediatr 28 217 226

11. GladstoneM

LancasterG

JonesA

MaletaK

MtitimilaE

2008 Can Western developmental screening tools be modified for use in a rural Malawian setting? Arch Dis Child 93 23 29

12. GladstoneM

LancasterG

UmarE

NyirendaM

KayiraE

2010 Creation of the MDAT (Malawi Developmental Assessment Tool): a qualitative analysis. Child Care Health Dev 36 346 353

13. LitwinM

1995 How to measure survey reliability and validity Thousand Oaks (California) Sage Publications

14. MaysN

PopeC

2000 Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. British Medical Journal 320 50 52

15. World Medical Association 2001 Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Bull World Health Organ 79 373 374

16. Van den BroekN

WhiteSA

GoodallM

NtonyaC

KayiraE

2009 The APPLe study: a randomized, community based, placebo-controlled trial of azithromycin for the prevention of preterm birth, with meta-analysis. PLoS Med 6 e1000191 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000191

17. World Health Organization Department of Nutrition for Health and Development. 2002 Principles of care. Training course on the management of severe malnutrition. 2: Annexe B: Weight-for-Height Reference Card Geneva World Health Organization

18. National Statistics Office (Zomba, Malawi) 2005 Malawi Demographic and Health Survey 2004, 0–40, Measure Demographic and Health Survey Calverton (Maryland) USAORC Macro

19. FrankenburgWK

DoddsJB

ArcherP

ShapiroH

BresnickB

1990 Denver II technical manual Denver, , Colorado Denver Developmental Materials Inc

20. LuizD

BarnardA

KnoesenN

KotrasN

HorrocksS

2004 Griffiths mental development scales - extended revised (GMDS-ER) administration manual Amersham (Bucks, UK) Association for Research in Child Development

21. BayleyN

1993 Bayley scales of infant development manual. 2nd edition Orlando, (Florida) The Psychological Association, Harcourt, Brace and Company

22. SimJ

WrightC

2002 Validity, reliability and allied concepts (Chapter 9). Research in health care, concepts, designs and methods Cheltenham (UK) Nelson-Thornes

23. Grantham-McGregorS

StewartME

DesaiP

1978 A new look at the assessment of mental development in young children recovering from severe malnutrition. Dev Med Child Neurol 20 773 778

24. PowellCA

WalkerSP

HimesJH

FletcherPD

Grantham-McGregorS

1995 Relationships between physical growth, mental development and nutritional supplementation in stunted children: the Jamaican study. Acta Paediatr 84 22 29

25. FilmerD

PritchettL

2008 Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data - or tears: an application to educational enrolments in states of India. Demography 38 115 132

26. Demographic and Health Survey 2008 DHS comparative reports 6. The DHS wealth index. 6, Calverton (Maryland): ORC Macro. Available: www.measuredhs.com. Accessed 12 March 2010

27. GwatkinD

RutsteinS

JohnsonK

PandeR

WagstaffA

2000 Socioeconomic differences in health, nutrition and population. health, nutrition and population discussion paper, Washington (D.C.): The World Bank. Available: http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/health/data/index.htm. Accessed 10 November 2009

28. KuczmarskiRJ

OgdenCL

Guo, National Centre for Health Statistics 2002 2000 CDC growth charts for the United States: methods and development. Vital Health Stat 11 1 190

29. US Centers for Disease Control 2008 Epi Info version 6. Available: http://www.cdc.gov/EpiInfo/. Accessed 3 April 2009

30. LemeshowS

HosmerD

1982 A review of goodness of fit statistics for use in the development of logistic regression models. Am J Epidemiol 115 92 106

31. GreenlandS

1995 Dose-response and trend analysis in epidemiology: alternatives to categorical analysis. Epidemiology 6 356 364

32. PastorR

GuallarE

1998 Use of two-segmented logistic regression to estimate change-points in epidemiological studies. Am J Epidemiol 148 631 642

33. LandisR

KochG

1977 The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33 159 174

34. DurkinMS

DavidsonLL

DesaiP

HasanZM

KhanN

2005 Validity of the ten-question screen for childhood disability: results from population based studies in Bangladesh, Jamaica and Pakistan. Epidemiology 5 283 289

35. AbubakarA

Van de VijverFJR

Van BaarA

MbonaniL

KaluR

2008 Socioeconomic status, anthropometric status and psychomotor development of Kenyan children from resource-limited settings: a path-analytic study. Early Hum Dev 84 613 621

36. LijmerJG

MolBW

HeisterkampS

BonselGJ

PrinsMH

1999 Empirical evidence of design related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 282 1061 1066