ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Construct and concurrent validity of test of infants' daily living activities.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Delays in psychomotor development in children could be an early indicator of elevated risk for developmental disorders. Early functional diagnostics enables the identification of abnormalities in various developmental domains and contributes to the initiation of specialized neurodevelopmental diagnostics. The objective of this study was to assess the construct and concurrent validity of the Test of Infants' Daily Living Activities. The focus was on identifying the construct validity of the Test of IDLA, demonstrating the concurrent validity of the Test of IDLA in relation to the Alberta Infant Motor Scale, as well as determining the predictive value of the Test of IDLA in assessing the development of postural and motor control in infants. Methods: The study included 357 children aged 1-18 months. Each child was thoroughly evaluated using the AIMS scale, in accordance with the methodology of the diagnostic tool's usage, and the Test of IDLA, which involved a postural control assessment sheet and a motor control evaluation sheet. Results: Comparison of Test of IDLA results with the reference AIMS scale demonstrated a statistically significant, positive correlation, with Spearman's rank correlation coefficient rho = 0.72, Conclusion: The Test of IDLA demonstrates high concordance with the reference AIMS scale in identifying motor developmental delays in children, in the domains of postural control and motor control. These findings indicate the utility of the Test of IDLA in the screening identification of neurodevelopmental disorders.
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.