The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems

Abstract Aim A little is known about predictive validity of and professionals' adherence to language screening protocols. This study assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children and the effects of protocol deviations by professionals. Methods A prospective cohort study of 124 children recruited and tested between October 2013 and December 2015. Children were recruited from four well child clinics in urban and rural areas. To validate the screening, we assessed children's language ability with standardised language t... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Visser‐Bochane, Margot
Luinge, Margreet
Dieleman, Liesbeth
van der Schans, Cees
Reijneveld, Sijmen
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2020
Reihe/Periodikum: Acta Paediatrica ; volume 110, issue 2, page 556-562 ; ISSN 0803-5253 1651-2227
Verlag/Hrsg.: Wiley
Schlagwörter: General Medicine / Pediatrics / Perinatology and Child Health
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-27079927
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apa.15447

Abstract Aim A little is known about predictive validity of and professionals' adherence to language screening protocols. This study assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2‐year‐old children and the effects of protocol deviations by professionals. Methods A prospective cohort study of 124 children recruited and tested between October 2013 and December 2015. Children were recruited from four well child clinics in urban and rural areas. To validate the screening, we assessed children's language ability with standardised language tests following the 2‐year screening and 1 year later. We assessed the concurrent and predictive validity of the screening and of protocol deviations. Results At 2 years, the sensitivity and specificity of the language screening were 0.79 and 0.86, and at 3 years 0.82 and 0.74, respectively. Protocol deviations by professionals were rare (7%) and did not significantly affect the validity of the screening. Conclusion The language screening protocol was valid for detecting current and later language problems. Deviations from the protocol by professionals were rare and did not affect the concurrent nor predictive validity of the protocol. The 2‐year language screening supports professionals working in preventive child health care and deserves wider implementation in well child care.