The Bayley Scale of infant and toddler Development- III is one of the best tests for screening in infants and toddlers for clinical and research purposes. Is this validated in other cultural environments?
From my experience in South Africa and specifically in early care and development this scale has been used uncritically . Validation is long and expensive process and therefore is not receiving much attention as it should. I guess validation according to socio cultural elements are recognised as crucial but has not been comprehensively approached due to expertise and dedicated funding to undertake such a project.
It has been validated in Slovenia (small European country neighbouring Italy, Austria, Croatia and Hungary). It was an expensive process, but it has been accomplished in 2004. Here is the link (in Slovenian though): http://www.center-pds.si/Katalogtestov/Razvojnipreizkusi/LestvicezgodnjegarazvojaNancyBayley-2izdaj.aspx
We use the scales in the Child Development department of a hospital in Singapore, especially when assessing toddlers who had Very Low Birth Weight. Because our population is so small, we usually do not carry out the extensive process of developing norms for our local children. However, with a qualified clinician, the scales can be used to get a sense of the child's level of development.
There are concerns about the use of a psychometric tool in a population other than the one in which the tool was developed.
To address possible cross-cultural bias when using developmental assessments in populations other than those for whom norms were developed, three approaches have been commonly used.
First, an entirely new test can be developed and normed for a specific population. Successful generation of a new test involves an inter-disciplinary research team, an adequate representative sample for testing items and test cohesion, and the concurrent development of norms or standards that represent typical development.A new test ensures a culturally appropriate psychometric tool but its development is resource-intensive and prohibits use beyond its target population, thus limiting comparability of findings with other tests and across populations.
An alternative to the development of a new test is the adaptation of existing tools for use in new populations. Published guidelines have been developed for this process, which typically involves translation of test materials, modification of test items inappropriate for the local context to preserve consistency with the constructs measured, followed by a process of iterative adaptation and testing of the assessment tool.While an adapted test improves cultural appropriateness, it is also resource-intensive and does not permit comparability between populations. Furthermore, although adaptation of existing assessment tools may reduce bias in test items measuring specific constructs, there remains a risk of bias unless these adaptations are accompanied by creation of local norms as children in one setting may perform better, on average, than children in another due to cultural differences in child rearing and access to early education.
Finally, tests developed in Europe and North America have been used in other populations in epidemiologic studies of specific exposures without adaptation by employing a healthy control group for comparison. Healthy children who serve as a control group can be used to reduce norm-related bias when assessing group-level differences in developmental delay. However, while use of controls allows comparisons of scores between groups, this approach does not allow the unbiased diagnosis of delay for individual children.
In Italy the scale was translated and standardized in 2009 by Rosa Ferri, Arturo Orsini e Ernesto Stoppa (University of Rome, La Sapienza).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Microbiology
- Virology
- Virus