Concurrent Validity and Reliability of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale in Infants at Dual Risk for Motor Delays

Snyder, Patricia; Eason, Jane; Philibert, Darbi Breath; Ridgway, Andrea; McCaughey, Tiffany

doi:10.1080/01942630802224892

Cited by 38 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The latter was converted to an age-corrected z score based on a Belgian standardization group because the original norm reference values of the AIMS are not representative for the Belgian population anymore (De Kegel et al 2013). High inter-rater and test-retest reliability and concurrent validity are reported (Piper & Darrah 1994;Jeng et al 2000;Blanchard et al 2004;Snyder et al 2008).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Examining the Impact of Cochlear Implantation on the Early Gross Motor Development of Children With a Hearing Loss

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study shows that the trajectory of gross motor development can be changed in children with a hearing loss after a cochlear implantation. Implanted children show a drop in their gross motor performance within the age range of 6 to 18 months, at which period the majority of the implantations took place, with a tendency of recovery toward the age of 2 years. However, longer follow-up will be necessary to trace whether the implanted children catch up their motor delay in comparison with nonimplanted children with a hearing loss at later age.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Examining the Impact of Cochlear Implantation on the Early Gross Motor Development of Children With a Hearing Loss

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The AIMS is a valid and reliable tool to examine gross motor development of infants between birth and onset of walking in various at-risk populations including low- and high-risk preterm infants (Snyder, Eason, Philibert, Ridgway, McCaughey, 2008). It is comprised of subscales assessing postural development in supine, prone, sit, and stand with nominal ratings of 0 or 1 for the behaviors “not observed” versus “observed”.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relation between early motor delay and later communication delay in infants at risk for autism

Bhat

Galloway

Landa

2012

Infant Behavior and Development

276

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Motor delays have been reported in retrospective studies of young infants who later develop Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs). Objective In this study, we prospectively compared the gross motor development of a cohort at risk for ASDs; infant siblings of children with ASDs (AU sibs) to low risk typically developing (LR) infants. Methods 24 AU sibs and 24 LR infants were observed at 3 and 6 months using a standardized motor measure, the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). In addition, as part of a larger study, the AU sibs also received a follow-up assessment to determine motor and communication performance at 18 months using the Mullen Scales of Early Learning. Results Significantly more AU sibs showed motor delays at 3 and 6 months than LR infants. The majority of the AU sibs showed both early motor delays and later communication delays. Limitations Small sample size and limited follow-up. Conclusions Early motor delays are more common in infant AU sibs than LR infants. Communication delays later emerged in 67–73% of the AU sibs who had presented with early motor delays. Overall, early motor delays may be predictive of future communication delays in children at risk for autism.

show abstract

“…2000)] have been reported. High concurrent validity was found between the AIMS and the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales' gross motor raw scores [healthy infants, r = 0.99 (Piper & Darrah 1994); infants at risk, r = 0.90–0.97 (Piper & Darrah 1994; Snyder et al . 2008)] and between the AIMS and the Bailey Scales of Infant development‐II raw scores [healthy infants, r = 0.97 (Piper & Darrah 1994); infants at risk, r = 0.93 (Piper & Darrah 1994); premature infants, r = 0.95 (Almeida et al .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

New reference values must be established for the Alberta Infant Motor Scales for accurate identification of infants at risk for motor developmental delay in Flanders

Kegel

Peersman

Onderbeke

et al. 2012

Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flemish infants recruited by formal day care services, show significantly lower motor scores than the Canadian norm population. New reference values should be established for the AIMS for accurate identification of infants at risk. Prevention of sudden infant death syndrome by promoting supine sleep position should go together with promotion of tummy time when awake and avoiding to spent too much time in sitting devices when awake.

show abstract

Concurrent Validity and Reliability of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale in Infants at Dual Risk for Motor Delays

Abstract: Concurrent validity of scores for the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and the Peabody Developmental Gross Motor Scale-2 (PDGMS-2) was examined with a sample of 35 infants at dual risk for motor delays or disabilities. Dual risk was defined as low birthweight ( Show more

Cited by 38 publications

References 11 publications

Examining the Impact of Cochlear Implantation on the Early Gross Motor Development of Children With a Hearing Loss

Examining the Impact of Cochlear Implantation on the Early Gross Motor Development of Children With a Hearing Loss

Relation between early motor delay and later communication delay in infants at risk for autism

New reference values must be established for the Alberta Infant Motor Scales for accurate identification of infants at risk for motor developmental delay in Flanders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About