ArticleInfant behavior & development2025
Composite scores for the NIH Baby Toolbox®.
Article in Infant behavior & development, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bringing developmental assessment to the 21st century: The NIH Baby Toolbox.Infant behavior & development · 2025Article
- NIH Baby Toolbox® methodology and norms development.Infant behavior & development · 2025Article
- Development and validation of the NIH Baby Toolbox® language measures.Infant behavior & development · 2025Article
- Development and validation of the NIH Baby Toolbox Social-Emotional Functioning measures.Infant behavior & development · 2025Article
- Development and validation of the motor measures in the NIH Baby Toolbox®.Infant behavior & development · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The NIH Baby Toolbox® offers assessments spanning Cognition, Motor, and Social-Emotional Functioning domains and includes both measure-level and composite scores. Here, we describe the creation of eight composite scores, reflecting Language, Executive Function/Memory, Math, Cognition, Motor, Self-Regulation, Negative Affect, and Social Communication - key constructs in infant and toddler development. Using composite scores rather than measure-specific scores can offer a more holistic evaluation of functioning by combining measures, reducing the impact of outliers and measurement error. Using factor analysis, data from the original Baby Toolbox norming study (N = 2515 recruited; n = 2479 with at least one composite score; n = 2025 English, n = 454 Spanish) were analyzed to derive composite scores. Analyses were conducted on regression-weighted factor scores for individual measures to define composites. Psychometric properties were assessed using composite reliability, test-retest reliability, and external validation with the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (3rd edition), Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (4th edition), and the child's age. Composite scores demonstrated excellent composite reliability, moderate to strong test-retest reliability, minimal practice effects for most scores, moderate and significant relations with most external measures, and moderate to strong correlations with age for abilities expected to improve with age. The Baby Toolbox composite scores offer a reliable, valid tool for assessing key areas of infant and toddler development. The evidence supporting their reliability and validity demonstrates their effectiveness as indicators of early cognitive, motor, and social-emotional growth, making them useful in clinical, research, and educational settings. This framework helps deepen our understanding and practical evaluation of developmental milestones during the early years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.