Application of neurodevelopmental screening to a sample of South American infants: The Bayley Infant Neurodevelopmental Screener (BINS)

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the utility of the Bayley Infant Neurodevelopmental Screener (BINS), standardized in the US, for South American infants, 3 to 24 months of age. Method Thirty-five physicians administered the BINS to 2,471 South American infants recruited during routine well-child visits, 578 (23%) from Brazil and 1,893 (77%) from six other South American countries. The BINS was translated into Spanish and Portuguese and participating physicians were trained to administer the BINS. Physician inter-rater agreement with training tapes was 84.4%; test-retest reliability for age item sets ranged from 0.80 to 0.93 (Pearson’s r). Infants were classified into being at low, moderate, or high risk for developmental delay or neurological impairment based on their total BINS score. The sample was stratified by infant’s age, sex and language (Spanish and Portuguese). The BINS scores were compared to the scores of the US infant sample used to standardize the BINS. Results Female infants performed higher than male at 16 to 20 months and 21 to 24 months; male infant scores were more variable at 5 to 6 months. Scores on only two items were significantly different between Spanish and Portuguese speaking participants. South American scores were typically significantly higher than the US sample, and a lower proportion of infants were classified as being at high risk in the South American sample than in the US standardization sample. Conclusion Overall, the results of this study indicate that the BINS is feasible and appropriate for neurodevelopmental screening in South America. Further studies are needed to confirm the BINS utility in South America, including its use with a clinical sample.

Latin American Collaborative Study of Congenital Malformations (ECLAMC): A Model for Health Collaborative Studies

“…A Net for data income from lying-in hospitals identified by ID codes (circles) sending data for at least 500 malformed infants (Split 500) to the coordination COORD (square). B Net for data income from lying-in hospitals identified by ID codes (circles) participating at 7 research projects (squares): HIPOSP: Hypospadias [6], PNF: natural family planning [23], DOWNSURV: Down syndrome survival [8], ECOTERAT: environmental teratogens [9], FOLAWARE: folic acid awareness [10], GLOBAL: global cleft project [11], and BINS: BINS development testing [12]. C Net for data outcome to scientific publications involving 12 centers from the Core Group identified by ID codes (squares), defined actors linked to most of the other actors, while the remaining centers belong to the periphery.…”

“…• BINS: This study intends to establish normal parameters in South American populations for the Bayley Infant Neurodevelopmental Screener (BINS) [12]. …”

Differences in early cognitive and receptive-expressive neurodevelopment by ancestry and underlying pathways in Brazil and Argentina

“…Children between ages 3 months and 24 months were enrolled between 2005 and 2006 into the parent study providing data for our analysis, which intended to assess the neurodevelopment of healthy infants. The children were recruited into the parent study during their well-child care visits to pediatric health facilities attended by physicians affiliated with that study (McCarthy et al, 2012). Given its focus on measuring neurodevelopment among healthy children, the parent study employed the following eligibility criteria for enrollment: singleton births with a birth weight ≥ 2,500 gm, gestational age ≥ 37 weeks, and Apgar scores ≥ 6.…”

“…The children had normal birth outcomes (birth weight, gestational age, Apgar scores), no major health complications, allowing us to primarily focus on variation in normal neurodevelopment among children without major physical health limitations. The children were enrolled by attending physicians during routine well-child care visits to pediatric clinics as part of another study of normal neurodevelopment among healthy children in South America, referred to hereafter as the “parent study” (McCarthy et al, 2012). The physicians affiliated with the parent study were trained and calibrated in administering the Bayley Infant Neurodevelopmental Screener, a standardized instrument that screens for infant neurodevelopment problems, achieving an 84.4% inter-rater reliability (McCarthy et al, 2012).…”

“…The children were enrolled by attending physicians during routine well-child care visits to pediatric clinics as part of another study of normal neurodevelopment among healthy children in South America, referred to hereafter as the “parent study” (McCarthy et al, 2012). The physicians affiliated with the parent study were trained and calibrated in administering the Bayley Infant Neurodevelopmental Screener, a standardized instrument that screens for infant neurodevelopment problems, achieving an 84.4% inter-rater reliability (McCarthy et al, 2012). The primary outcomes were measures of overall child’s performance on the instrument and on two specific domains including cognitive and receptive-expressive functioning.…”