Predictive and concurrent validity of standardized neurodevelopmental examinations by the Griffiths scales and Bayley...

Area of Science:

• Neurodevelopmental assessment
• Pediatric developmental evaluation
• Infant neurodevelopment

Background:

• Standardized examinations are crucial for identifying preterm infants needing early intervention.
• Assessing the validity of neurodevelopmental tests in healthy term and preterm infants is essential.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the predictive power and concurrent validity of the Bayley MDI and Griffiths DQ.
• To compare these assessments in healthy term and preterm infants (<1500g) without major perinatal complications.

Main Methods:

• 137 infants (89 term, 48 preterm) were assessed using Bayley and Griffiths scales at 6, 12, and 22 months corrected age.
• A subset of 114 infants underwent Bayley assessments at 39 months corrected age.
• Correlations and Bland Altman plots analyzed test agreement; Cohen's kappa assessed diagnostic agreement.

Main Results:

• Significant correlations were found between Bayley and Griffiths scales at 6, 12, and 22 months (r=0.530 to 0.833).
• Major systematic bias and wide limits of agreement were observed between the tests at 6 and 22 months.
• Agreement for diagnosing developmental impairment between early assessments (6, 12, 22 months) and the reference 39-month Bayley assessment was poor for both scales.

Conclusions:

• While Bayley and Griffiths scales correlate, significant biases and wide agreement limits necessitate caution.
• Early neurodevelopmental assessments in well preterm infants show poor predictive validity for later developmental impairment.
• Clinical interpretation of standardized neurodevelopmental tests in the first two years of life requires careful consideration.