ArticlePediatric research2026
Inter-rater reliability and agreement of the Bayley-4 in a multidisciplinary team.
Article in Pediatric research, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development are widely used to assess early development, yet evidence for inter-rater reliability in multidisciplinary contexts remains limited. This study evaluated inter-rater reliability and agreement of the newest edition, Bayley-4, at age two years when administered by a multidisciplinary allied health team within a longitudinal cohort. Participants were 100 children comprising a randomly selected 5% subsample of the population-based Early Moves study in Perth, Australia. Assessments were independently double scored in real time by 18 trained clinicians (seven physiotherapists, six occupational therapists, three speech pathologists and two psychologists). Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% confidence intervals, and agreement using Bland-Altman analysis. Inter-rater reliability was excellent across Cognitive, Language and Motor composite scores and subtest scaled scores (ICC range: 0.96-1.00). Mean differences between raters were negligible, and limits of agreement were narrow and within predefined clinically acceptable thresholds (<±0.5 SD). These findings demonstrate that excellent inter-rater reliability and agreement for the Bayley-4 can be achieved within a large multidisciplinary allied health team when supported by formal structured training and ongoing standardisation procedures. Further research should evaluate reliability in clinical populations and routine service contexts. IMPACT: The Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Fourth Edition (Bayley-4) demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability and clinically acceptable agreement at age two years. High scoring consistency was achieved across a large multidisciplinary allied health team. Reliability was maintained even among clinicians without prior Bayley experience following structured training and standardised protocols. This study provides independent evidence of Bayley-4 inter-rater reliability beyond the standardisation sample. Findings support multidisciplinary assessment models and highlight the importance of accredited training, supervised practice and ongoing feedback processes for maintaining reliable neurodevelopmental assessment outcomes.
Identifiers
42521795What 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.