Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31487302›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Concurrent validity of the Ages and Stages Questionnaire and the Bayley Scales of Infant Development III in China.

Ai Yue, Qi Jiang, Biaoyue Wang, Cody Abbey, Alexis Medina, Yaojiang Shi, Scott Rozelle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ai YueCenter for Experimental Economics in Education (CEEE), Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Qi JiangCenter for Experimental Economics in Education (CEEE), Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8054-5390
Biaoyue WangSchool of Software and Microelectronics, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1828-2208
Cody AbbeyFreeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Alexis MedinaFreeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Yaojiang ShiCenter for Experimental Economics in Education (CEEE), Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Scott RozelleFreeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Choosing a valid and feasible method to measure child developmental outcomes is key to addressing developmental delays, which have been shown to be associated with high levels of unemployment, participation in crime, and teen pregnancies. However, measuring early childhood development (ECD) with multi-dimensional diagnostic tests such as the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development III (Bayley-III) can be time-consuming and expensive; therefore, parental screening tools such as the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ-3) are frequently an alternative measure of early childhood development in large-scale research. The ASQ is also becoming more frequently used as the first step to identify children at risk for developmental delays before conducting a diagnostic test to confirm. However, the effectiveness of the ASQ-3 is uncertain. In this study, we evaluate the accuracy of the ASQ-3 as a screening measure for children at risk of developmental delay in rural China by age group. To do so, we administered the Bayley-III, widely considered to be the "gold standard" of ECD diagnostic tests, to a sample of 1,831 five to twenty-four month-old children and also administered the ASQ-3 to their caregivers. We then compared the outcomes of the ASQ-3 test to those of the Bayley-III. We find that the ASQ-3 was significantly though weakly correlated with the Bayley-III and that the strength of this correlation increased with child age and was stronger when the mother was the primary caregiver (as compared to the grandmother). We also find that the sensitivity and specificity of ASQ-3 ranged widely. The overall findings suggest that the ASQ-3 may not be a very accurate screening tool for identifying developmentally delayed children, especially for children under 13 months of age or children whose primary caregiver is not the mother.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningParentsChild DevelopmentChild, PreschoolChinaDevelopmental DisabilitiesFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMothersNeuropsychological TestsPregnancyReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID31487302
PMCPMC6728026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.