Developmental evaluation at age 4: Validity of an Italian parental questionnaire
Article first published online: 8 JUN 2010
© 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2010 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (Royal Australasian College of Physicians)
Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health
Volume 46, Issue 7-8, pages 419–426, July/August 2010
How to Cite
Dall'Oglio, A. M., Rossiello, B., Coletti, M. F., Caselli, M. C., Ravà, L., Di Ciommo, V., Orzalesi, M., Giannantoni, P. and Pasqualetti, P. (2010), Developmental evaluation at age 4: Validity of an Italian parental questionnaire. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 46: 419–426. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2010.01748.x
- Issue published online: 16 JUL 2010
- Article first published online: 8 JUN 2010
- Accepted for publication 6 January 2010.
- neuropsychological profiles;
- parent-report measures;
- preschool evaluation
Aim: To validate an Italian parental questionnaire designed to evaluate the neuropsychological and behavioural developmental status of 4-year-olds and identify children in need of further evaluation.
Methods: The questionnaire (Questionario per la valutazione dello Sviluppo di bambini a 4 anni – Genitori (QS4-G) ) consisted of 93 questions divided into 10 areas: language, visual-motor abilities, memory/attention, fine and gross motor and self-help abilities, lateralisation, social skills, stress, sleep, alimentation and evacuation. It was distributed to 263 parents of 4-year-olds: 94 healthy preterm (gestational age <33 weeks and/or <1500 g, without major neurosensory damage); 44 children with developmental disorders and 125 children with typical development. Cognitive and neuropsychological evaluations were performed using standardised tests.
Results: The internal consistency of the areas was adequate (Cronbach's alpha: 0.69–0.79). The correlation coefficients (r=|0.30|–|0.68|) with standardised tests (Griffiths, Vineland and neuropsychological tests) indicated a good concurrent validity. The receiver operating characteristic curve, for predicting a Griffiths Quotient less than 81, showed an area under the curve of 0.90 and a high diagnostic and discriminatory capacity (sensitivity of 0.88 and specificity of 0.84) for the optimal cut-off (value 48.4).
Conclusion: The QS4-G seems to be a valid tool for identifying 4-year-old children at risk for low or borderline cognitive development and/or problematic behaviour who need a complete assessment. It can describe individual neuropsychological profiles. QS4-G is not a diagnostic tool. It is useful for outcome studies in preterm children and in other pathologies. It could also be useful for preschooler prevention programmes.