Issues in the development of cross‐cultural assessments of speech and language for children

Carter, Julie A.; Lees, Janet; Murira, Gladys; Gona, Joseph; Neville, Brian; Newton, Charles R.

doi:10.1080/13682820500057301

Cited by 113 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The test administrations in Sri Lanka were carried out in Sinhalese and Tamil, the principal languages of Sri Lanka. As a test is translated and adapted for use, the issue of cross-cultural validity arises, as even identical test items constructed from accurate translations may not necessarily reflect the same functions, with comparable levels of difficulty (Chan et al 2003;Carter et al 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmental screening in context: adaptation and standardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test‐II (DDST‐II) for Sri Lankan children

Wijedasa

2011

Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. AbstractBackground Developmental problems in children can be alleviated to a great extent with early detection and intervention through periodic screening for developmental delays during pre-school ages. Currently, there is no established system for developmental screening of children in Sri Lanka. Although some developmental norms, which are similar to those of Denver Developmental Screening Test-II (DDST-II), have been introduced into the Sri Lankan Child Health Developmental Record (CHDR), those norms have not been standardized to the Sri Lankan child population. The aim of this research was to establish Sri Lankan norms for DDST-II and to test the universal and regional applicability of developmental screening tests by comparing the Sri Lankan norms with the norms of DDST-II and DDST-Singapore norms, the geographically nearest standardization of DDST-II. The norms were also compared with the milestones already available in the CHDR. Methods DDST-II was adapted and standardized on a sample of 4251 Sri Lankan children aged 0-80 months. Thirteen public health nursing sisters were trained to collect the data as part of their routine work. The 25th, 50th, 75th and 90th percentile ages of acquiring each developmental milestone were then calculated using logistic regression. Results The Denver Developmental Screening Test for Sri Lankan Children (DDST-SL) was created. Most of the established DDST-SL norms were different to the comparable norms in DDST-II, DDST-Singapore and the CHDR. Conclusions In view of the results of the study, it is imperative that developmental screening tests are used in context and are adapted and standardized to the populations in question before utilization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmental screening in context: adaptation and standardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test‐II (DDST‐II) for Sri Lankan children

Wijedasa

2011

Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Carter et al (2005) outlined several guidelines that could be followed when adapting standardised instruments: include native speakers of the home language/dialect in the development of the instrument; pilot-test the assessment on a representative sample of typically developing children from the home community; pilot-test any pictures by asking typically developing children from the community to identify them; pilot-test instructions to identify deficits in the home language/ dialect; if whenever possible, have the assessment administered by native speakers; use material familiar to children from the community; and for children who are unfamiliar with the testing situation, consider giving extra practice items. Making modifications to a standardised test invalidates the standardisation and thus, an SLP would not be able to use the test to see if the child was significantly different than her peers.…”

Section: Adaptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech-language pathologists as determiners of the human right to diversity in communication for school children in the US

Farrugia

2017

International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression -the right to communication. Communication is at the core of the speech-language pathology (SLP) profession. Yet, while we celebrate the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights some of our most vulnerable youth are being placed in special education at disproportional rates. School-based SLPs in the United States may be unwittingly contributing to this phenomenon, obstructing the human right to communication because of biased assessment procedures. However, increasing cultural competence, diversifying the profession, and utilising additional assessment measures are actions that can be taken to promote equity in assessment for all children.

show abstract

“…34 Se ha descrito menor desarrollo del lenguaje en condiciones de pobreza y es una de las áreas más sensible a característi-cas culturales y del idioma. En nuestro estudio encontramos retrasos entre los nueve y 16 meses de edad, pero predominaron los adelantos, especialmente después de los 18 meses.…”

Section: 28unclassified

Edad de presentación de los reactivos del Test de Denver II en Niños de 0 a 4 años de edad del Estado de Morelos

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe Denver Developmental Screening Test (Denver II) is the most used internationally tool for child development surveillance, from which assessments and changes have been made in several countries, from the estimate of the age of presentation of the items, because it constitutes the basis of its structure and validity. ObjectiveTo identify the age and sequences acquiring of each item of the Denver-II test during the first four years of life in children of low socioeconomic status from a community of Morelos State, Mexico.Method 2350 assessments were conducted to children from 0 to 48 months of age. A logistic regression model was used to estimate the age of presentation of each item to the centiles 25th, 50th, 75th and 90th. Differences were established with values of reference based on confidence intervals up to 95% for 90th centile. ResultsOf the 98 items evaluated, 42 were submitted delayed, 23 showed no statistical difference and 33 were acquired in earlier age in children of Morelos. In the Gross Motor and Personal-social areas predominated the delayed with 19/25 and 11/21 items, respectively. By contrast, in Fine Motor-Adaptive and Language predominated the advances, with 11/22 and 16/30 items. ConclusionsThere are differences in the age and sequence of presentation of the items of the Denver-II test in the population studied. Adjustments are recommended before implementing its use in specific socio-cultural contexts.Key words: Child development, DSST-II, Denver II Test, developmental screening, psychometrics. RESUMENUno de los instrumentos más utilizados a nivel internacional en la vigilancia del desarrollo del niño es la segunda versión del Denver Developmental Screening Test (DENVER II), del cual se han hecho evaluaciones y modificaciones en varios países, a partir de la estimación de la edad de presentación de los reactivos, pues constituye la base de su estructura y validez. ObjetivoIdentificar las edades y secuencias de presentación de los reactivos del Test Denver II en los cuatro primeros años de vida en niños de condición socioeconómica baja de una comunidad del Estado de Morelos, México. MétodoSe realizaron 2350 evaluaciones a niños de 0 a 48 meses de edad. Mediante un modelo de regresión logística se estimó la edad de presentación de cada reactivo para los percentiles 25, 50, 75 y 90. Se establecieron diferencias con los valores de referencia del instrumento con base en los intervalos de confianza al 95% para el percentil 90. ResultadosDe los 98 reactivos evaluados, 42 se presentaron con retraso; 23 no mostraron diferencias estadísticas y 33 se lograron antes por los niños del estudio. En las áreas Motor grueso y Personal-social predominaron los retrasos en 19/25 y 11/21 reactivos respectivamente. Por el contrario en Motor Fino-Adaptativo y Lenguaje predominaron los adelantos en 11 de 22 y 16 de 30 reactivos. ConclusionesExisten diferencias en las edades y secuencias de presentación de los reactivos del Test de Denver II en la población estudiada. Se recomienda realizar ajustes antes de i...

show abstract

Issues in the development of cross‐cultural assessments of speech and language for children

Cited by 113 publications

References 53 publications

Developmental screening in context: adaptation and standardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test‐II (DDST‐II) for Sri Lankan children

Developmental screening in context: adaptation and standardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test‐II (DDST‐II) for Sri Lankan children

Speech-language pathologists as determiners of the human right to diversity in communication for school children in the US

Edad de presentación de los reactivos del Test de Denver II en Niños de 0 a 4 años de edad del Estado de Morelos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About