Concurrent validity of the ages and stages questionnaires with Bayley Scales of Infant Development-III at 2 years - Singapore cohort study.

Background: With increasing acceptance of universal developmental screening in primary care, it is essential to evaluate the local validity and psychometric properties of commonly used questionnaires like the parent-completed Ages and Stages Questionnaires, 3rd Edition (ASQ-3) in identifying developmental delays. The aim of this study is to assess the convergent validity of the ASQ-3 with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-3rd edition (Bayley-III) in identifying developmental delay in a low-risk term cohort in Singapore.
Methods: ASQ-3 and Bayley-III data was collected prospectively with generation of ASQ-3 cut-off scores using three different criteria: 1-standard deviation (SD) (Criterion-I) or 2-SD (Criterion-II) below the mean, and using a Receiver Operator Curve (ROC) (Criterion-III). Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were calculated. Correlations between the ASQ-3 and Bayley-III domains were evaluated using Pearson coefficients.
Results: With all three criteria across different domains ASQ-3 showed high specificity (72-99%) and NPV (69-98%), but lower sensitivity (19-74%) and PPV (11-59%). Criterion-I identified 11-21% of children as "at-risk of developmental delay," and was the most promising criterion measure, with high specificity (82-91%), NPV (69-74%) and overall agreement of 64-71%. Moderate-strong correlations were seen between ASQ-3 Communication and Bayley-III Language scales (r = 0.44-0.59, p < 0.01). The lowest sensitivities were seen in the motor domains.
Conclusions: ASQ-3 is reliable in low-risk settings in identifying typically developing children not at risk of developmental delay, but it has modest sensitivity. Moderate-strong correlations seen in the communication domain are clinically important for early identification of language delay, which is one of the most prevalent areas of early childhood developmental delay.
Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.
(Copyright © 2024 Taiwan Pediatric Association. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)