Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

W K Frankenburg

Publications and source records attributed to W K Frankenburg.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

The Denver II: a major revision and restandardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test.

Since the Denver Developmental Screening Test was first published 23 years ago, it has been utilized worldwide and restandardized in more than a dozen countries. Concerns raised through the years by test users about specific items and features of the Denver Developmental Screening Test, coupled with a need for more current norms, have prompted a major revision and restandardization of the test. For the revision, 336 potential items were administered to more than 2000 children. The average number of times each item was administered was 540. Using regression analysis, composite norms for the total sample and norms for subgroups (based on gender, ethnicity, maternal education, and place of residence), were used to determine new age norms. The final selection of the 125 Denver II items was based on the following criteria: ease of administration and scoring, item appeal to child and examiner, item test-retest and inter-rater reliability, minimal "refusal" scores, minimal "no opportunity" scores, minimal subgroup differences, and a smooth step-like progression of ages at which 90% of children could perform the tasks. The major differences between the Denver II and the Denver Developmental Screening Test are: 1) an 86% increase in language items; 2) two articulation items; 3) a new age scale; 4) a new category of item interpretation to identify milder delays; 6) a behavior rating scale; and 7) new training materials.

Child↗
PubMed1989

Denver developmental activities: a preliminary report.

A study was undertaken to develop activity sheets that can be given to parents at the time of child health maintenance visits. A series of 200 activities for parents to undertake with their children were arranged into 11 age groups and four areas: self-care and socialization, speech, small muscle skills, and large muscle skills. A national field test involved 53 private and public practices already using a parent-answered developmental questionnaire. The practices gave the Denver Developmental Activities and survey questionnaires to parents, and completed professional survey questionnaires. Fifty-one professional questionnaires and 79 parent questionnaires were returned. The professionals liked the Activities and did not feel that they slowed their practices. Parents found the Activities enjoyable and easy to understand. Less educated parents reported that the Activities increased their knowledge and prompted them to discuss child development issues with their child's health provider. This survey is considered preliminary, since it was limited to health practices already manifesting interest in child development, and it is not known what percent of parent questionnaires were returned. The latter point precludes one from making generalizations to a larger population.

Adult↗
PubMed1988

Validation of key Denver Developmental Screening Test items: a preliminary study.

Three sequential studies were undertaken to identify a subset of 39 key Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) items covering the ages from birth to 6 years. The first study used binary integer programming with a sample of 2343 children evaluated with the DDST in Denver's Neighborhood Health Program. It identified 35 DDST items that would identify 100% abnormal and 97.9% abnormal and questionable DDSTs. A further validation with 113 Pitt County, North Carolina, children indicated that the addition of four more DDST items to the previous 35 would identify 100% abnormal and 92.6% abnormal and questionable DDSTs. A third study cross-validating the 39 items with a sample of 180 children at "high risk" identified 100% abnormal and 91.7% abnormal and questionable DDSTs. The 39 key DDST items ranged throughout the entire age span and among the DDST's four sectors. Use requires the administration of approximately four items at any one age, on average. Those children with suspect scores on the key DDST items (about 19% of a low-income population) should be screened with the remainder of the DDST to decrease overreferrals. For accuracy, the key DDST items must be administered in the manner prescribed in the DDST manual.

Child↗
PubMed1988

Common pitfalls in the evaluation of developmental screening tests.

Wilson has written that screening puts a responsibility on the physician to provide some benefit to the person being screened. He made the distinction between the physician who is confronted by a patient with a problem that the physician may attempt to cure with unproved means, on one hand, and persons who mount community screening programs with unproved procedures on the other. He considers the former to be ethical and the latter unethical. Similarly, we consider the failure to avoid pitfalls--such as improper screening test administration, failure to use reliable outcome criteria, making inappropriate (although well-intentioned) predictions, and making inappropriate generalizations or drawing inappropriate conclusions--to be unethical. The pitfalls jeopardize the achievement of the desired outcome by screening programs. They also lead to inappropriate conclusions and possibly, therefore, to the use of inappropriate tests. If the scientific community does not take steps to avoid such pitfalls in developmental screening, it invites those who make health care decisions to eliminate such screening or to mandate procedures which may not be scientifically sound. Neither of these alternatives is acceptable. The only alternative, first, is to ensure that one avoids common pitfalls when screening in one's own practice and, second, to be on guard against developmental screening studies and reports that fail to avoid these errors.

Child↗
PubMed1987

Revision of Denver Prescreening Developmental Questionnaire.

The Denver Prescreening Developmental Questionnaire (PDQ), a parent-answered questionnaire, has been revised to extend the age of children who can be screened to those from 6 years down to birth, to make the test items more challenging for children and more informative for parents, and to make it easier for professionals to compare a child's performance with Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) norms. This Revised PDQ (R-PDQ) identified 84% of nonnormal DDST results. Test-retest reliability over 1 week was 94.1%, and parent-teacher agreement was 83%. A field test of the R-PDQ, conducted in a variety of settings with 1434 children, revealed that suspect scores on first-stage screening varied with the setting, from 15.6% in private pediatric practices to 50.5% in Head Start and urban day care centers. Parents found the R-PDQ interesting and easy to complete; health professionals found it economical and easy to interpret. We recommend that the R-PDQ be coupled with a brief developmental examination, and that the R-PDQ be used in busy office settings and community mass screening programs.

Child↗
PubMed1986

Home Screening Questionnaire: its validity in assessing home environment.

To develop a quick, practical tool to identify home environments likely to be suboptimal for the development of children, we adapted segments of the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment (HOME) Inventory, which assesses the environments of children from birth to 6 years, and devised the Home Screening Questionnaire (HSQ). Whereas the HOME Inventory requires a home visit, the HSQ consists of two forms, one for children from birth to 3 years, another for 3 to 6 years, that are completed by parents without a home visit. The questions are formulated at the third to sixth grade reading level and can be completed in 15 to 20 minutes. Scoring and interpretation by a professional takes 5 minutes. HSQ questions were answered by more than 1500 parents of low-income families. Between 81% and 86% of the environments determined to be of concern by the HOME Inventory were identified by the briefer and less expensive HSQ. Thus the HSQ readily lends itself to use by health care providers who serve low-income families.

Child↗
PubMed1984

Developmental screening.

In addition to the treatment of diseases, the current emphasis is for primary care physicians to foster growth and development of children under their care. Early and routine monitoring of growth are essential in identifying children who fall below the norm. A two-stage screening process is recommended.

Child↗
PubMed1982

Applied biomedical research in mental retardation--prevention.

Prevention of mental retardation is discussed in terms of etiology and level of prevention (primary, secondary or tertiary). The aim of primary preventive medicine is to avert the disease before its onset. Secondary preventive medicine involves early identification and treatment of a disease to reduce its duration and/or severity. Tertiary prevention limits the degree of disability and fosters rehabilitation in chronic diseases. Prevention of mental retardation relies heavily on primary and secondary preventive techniques. Generally, preventive techniques related to organically caused mental retardation are secondary. Attempts are made to identify and treat impairments which cause deficient mental functioning. Since such impairments can occur at any time and are not always observable, routine developmental screening is recommended. A two-stage developmental screening procedure developed by the authors consists of an abbreviated version of the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) followed by the full DDST when indicated. Primary preventive techniques are appropriate for the prevention of environmentally-caused mental retardation. If negative environmental influences can be identified and eliminated early, socio-cultural mental retardation might be averted or if identified early may be decreased to prevent the retardation process. To meet the need for an environmental screening instrument, the authors developed the Home Screening Questionnaire (HSQ). A combined developmental/environmental screening process is recommended.

Child↗
PubMed1981

The relationship between twelve-month home stimulation and school achievement.

Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment (HOME) was designed to reflect parental support of early cognitive and socioemotional development. 12-month HOME scores were correlated with elementary school achievement, 5--9 years later. 50 low-income children were rank ordered by a weighted average of centile estimates of achievement test scores, letter grades, and curriculum levels in reading and math. 24 children were classified as having significant school achievement problems. The HOME total score correlated significantly, r = .37, with school centile scores among the low-income families. The statistically more appropriate contingency table analysis revealed a 68% correct classification rate and a significantly reduced error rate over random or blanket prediction. The results supported the predictive value of the 12-month HOME for school achievement among low-income families. In an additional sample of 21 middle-income families, there was insufficient variability among HOME scores to allow prediction. The HOME total scores were highly correlated, r = .86, among siblings tested at least 10 months apart.

Achievement↗
PubMed1977

Preschool developmental testing in prediction of school problems. Studies of 55 children in Denver.

Sixty-five children from lower income families, first evaluated with the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale at age 4 to 6 years, were followed up 3 years later to determine how well preschool test results could predict later school problems. Eighty-eight per cent of children with Abnormal DDSTs, 66% of children with Questionable DDSTs, and 32% of children with Normal DDSTs showed later school problems. Combining DDST and IQ results did not change the total number of children who would be misclassified, but the type of misclassification changed. When developmental screening is used to identify children at risk for developing school problems, children with Questionable findings should be referred for further evaluation along with those with Abnormal findings since a high percentage of Questionables develop school problems despite adequate intelligence.

Child↗