Objective Parents’ tracking of developmental milestones can assist healthcare providers with early detection of developmental delays and appropriate referrals to early intervention. Crowdsourcing is one way to update the content and age data distribution of developmental checklists for parents and providers. This feasibility study examined which developmental milestones parents chose to track and what they added beyond traditional milestones, using the babyTRACKS crowd-based mobile app. Method We analyzed the developmental diaries of 3,832 children, registered in the babyTRACKS app at an average age of 9.3 months. Their parents recorded a median of 5 milestones per diary, selecting from the accumulating lists of age-appropriate milestones or authoring new milestones. The final database included 645 types of milestones; 89.15% were developmental, of which 43.6% were comparable to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) milestones while the rest were crowd-authored. Milestones were categorized into developmental domains: Gross Motor, Fine Motor, Oral Motor, Self-Care, Cognitive, Language Comprehension, Speech, Non-Verbal Communication, Social, Emotional, and Regulation. Results On average, the milestone domains of Gross Motor, Fine Motor, Cognitive and Social were the most added to diaries (20%-30% of a diary). Within the Cognitive, Speech and Language Comprehension domains there were significantly more CDC comparable versus crowd-authored milestones (29% versus 21%, 22% versus 10%, 8% versus 4%). In contrast, within the Regulation and Oral Motor domains there were more crowd versus CDC milestones (17% versus 3%, 9% versus 3%). Crowd-authored Speech milestones were significantly older by 7 months than CDC milestones. Conclusion Tracking daily observations of child development provides a window into personally relevant milestones for the child and parent. The crowd of parents can independently track and add new milestones across main developmental domains. Regulation and Oral Motor development especially interest parents. Parents may be less aware of early progress in Language Comprehension and Speech; thus, these domains require more structured screening. Designing mobile early screening which is crowd-based engages parents as proactive partners in developmental tracking.
No abstract
This study investigated whether or not performance differed between Young and Older Exercisers and between Young and Older Non-exercisers on the Attention Processing Training-Test (APT-Test), Behavioral Assessment of Dysexecutive Syndrome (BADS), and Functional Assessment of Verbal Reasoning and Executive Strategies (FAVRES).Methods: A total of 119 participants were divided into the following groups: 46 Young Exercisers: (aged 18-40 years), 45 Older Exercisers (aged 60 and older), fourteen Young Nonexercisers, and fourteen Older Non-exercisers. Participants completed the APT-Test, BADS, and FAVRES in a counterbalanced manner. Independent sample t-tests were used to calculate outcomes.Results: Young Exercisers had significantly higher scores than Older Exercisers on the APT-Test, BADS Total Profile Score, and the FAVRES Total Accuracy Score. No significant differences occurred between Young and Older Exercisers on the FAVRES Total Rationale, Total Time, or Reasoning scores. No statistically significant differences occurred on any measures between Young and Older Non-exercisers.Conclusions: Different performance trends occurred between the Exerciser groups and the Non-exerciser groups. For example, both Exerciser groups performed similarly on the FA-VRES when asked to justify their responses and perform reasoning tasks. Older Exercisers provided correct responses for Accuracy measures, yet their responses did not earn the total points. No differences occurred on any test between the Non-exerciser groups. Thus, it could be helpful for clinicians to inquire about patients' pre-morbid exercise habits when using these tests. Participants were healthy, neurologically intact adults. Future research should investigate potential effects exercise has on these tests in adults with acquired neurological damage.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.