TY - JOUR
T1 - Criterion Validity and Applicability of Motor Screening Instruments in Children Aged 5-6 Years
T2 - A Systematic Review
AU - van Dokkum, Nienke H
AU - Reijneveld, Sijmen A
AU - de Best, Judith Th B W
AU - Hamoen, Marleen
AU - Te Wierike, Sanne C M
AU - Bos, Arend F
AU - de Kroon, Marlou L A
PY - 2022/1/1
Y1 - 2022/1/1
N2 - The detection of motor developmental problems, especially developmental coordination disorder, at age 5-6 contributes to early interventions. Here, we summarize evidence on (1) criterion validity of screening instruments for motor developmental problems at age 5-6, and (2) their applicability. We systematically searched seven databases for studies assessing criterion validity of these screening instruments using the M-ABC as reference standard. We applied COSMIN criteria for systematic reviews of screening instruments to describe the correlation between the tests and the M-ABC. We extracted information on correlation coefficients or area under the receiver operating curve, sensitivity and specificity, and applicability in practice. We included eleven studies, assessing eight instruments: three performance-based tests (MAND, MOT 4-6, BFMT) and five questionnaires (DCD-Q, PQ, ASQ-3, MOQ-T-FI, M-ABC-2-C). The quality of seven studies was fair, one was good, and three were excellent. Seven studies reported low correlation coefficients or AUC (<0.70), four did not report these. Sensitivities ranged from 21-87% and specificities from 50-96%, with the MOT4-6 having the highest sensitivity and specificity. The DCD-Q, PQ, ASQ-3, MOQ-T-FI, and M-ABC-2-C scored highest on applicability. In conclusion, none of the instruments were sufficiently valid for motor screening at age 5-6. More research is needed on screening instruments of motor delay at age 5-6.
AB - The detection of motor developmental problems, especially developmental coordination disorder, at age 5-6 contributes to early interventions. Here, we summarize evidence on (1) criterion validity of screening instruments for motor developmental problems at age 5-6, and (2) their applicability. We systematically searched seven databases for studies assessing criterion validity of these screening instruments using the M-ABC as reference standard. We applied COSMIN criteria for systematic reviews of screening instruments to describe the correlation between the tests and the M-ABC. We extracted information on correlation coefficients or area under the receiver operating curve, sensitivity and specificity, and applicability in practice. We included eleven studies, assessing eight instruments: three performance-based tests (MAND, MOT 4-6, BFMT) and five questionnaires (DCD-Q, PQ, ASQ-3, MOQ-T-FI, M-ABC-2-C). The quality of seven studies was fair, one was good, and three were excellent. Seven studies reported low correlation coefficients or AUC (<0.70), four did not report these. Sensitivities ranged from 21-87% and specificities from 50-96%, with the MOT4-6 having the highest sensitivity and specificity. The DCD-Q, PQ, ASQ-3, MOQ-T-FI, and M-ABC-2-C scored highest on applicability. In conclusion, none of the instruments were sufficiently valid for motor screening at age 5-6. More research is needed on screening instruments of motor delay at age 5-6.
U2 - 10.3390/ijerph19020781
DO - 10.3390/ijerph19020781
M3 - Review article
C2 - 35055607
VL - 19
JO - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
JF - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
SN - 1661-7827
IS - 2
M1 - 781
ER -