Individual or Group-based Approach to the Assessment of Preschool Children: A Comparison using the INTERGROWTH-21st Neurodevelopment Assessment (INTER-NDA)
Introduction: It is unclear if the assessment of early child development can be carried out using a group approach, as opposed to individually.
Objective: To compare scores obtained from children aged 22 to 26 months assessed either in small groups or individually using the INTERGROWTH-21st Neurodevelopment Assessment (INTER-NDA), which measures cognition, language, motor skills, behavior, attention and socio-emotional reactivity.
Methods: A small group based strategy for administering and scoring the INTER-NDA was developed. Thirty-six preschool children attending four Centros de Cuidado y Atención Infantil of the Sistema Nacional para el Desarrollo Integral de la Familia (DIF) of Mexico were assessed in small groups of three children by a teacher specifically trained in the INTER-NDA. A second teacher, unaware of the group results, assessed the children individually on a different day. The sex, age, weight, length and head circumference of the children at the time of assessment were recorded.
Results: INTER-NDA domain scores for group and individual assessments were statistically significantly correlated (range r=0.35 to r=1.00) for all domains except receptive language (r=0.25, p=0.14). Bland-Altman analysis showed agreement between group and individual scores for the language, behavior, attention and socio-emotional reactivity domains, and consistency (but not agreement) between group and individual scores for the cognitive and motor domains. None of the differences between group and individual scores examined were statistically significant, even after adjusting for the children’s age, sex, nutritional status and location of the preschool.
Conclusion: INTER-NDA domain specific scores obtained following group and individual assessment of children aged 22 to 26 months are consistent. It is feasible for trained preschool teachers to administer INTER-NDA at both group and individual level.
2. Bayley N. Bayley scales of infant and toddler development, third edition. San Antonio, TX: Pearson Education Inc.; 2006.
3. Griffiths R. The abilities of babies: a study in mental measurement. New York, NY, US: McGraw-Hill; 1954. 229 p.
4. Frankenburg WK, Dodds JB. The Denver developmental screening test. J Pediatr. 1967;71(2):181-91. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3476(67)80070-2
5. Fernandes M, Stein A, Newton CRJ, Ismail LC, Kihara M, Wulff K, et al. The INTERGROWTH-21st Project Neurodevelopment Package: A novel method for the multi-dimensional assessment of neurodevelopment in pre-school age children PLoS ONE. 2014;9((11): e113360). Epub 25 November 2014. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113360.
6. Villar J, Altman DG, Purwar M, Noble JA, Knight HE, Ruyan P, et al. The objectives, design and implementation of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project. BJOG 2013;120:9-26. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12047.
7. Harkness J, Pennell B, Villar A, Gebler N, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, Bilgen I. Translation procedures and translation assessment in the World Mental Health Survey Initiative. The WHO World Mental Health Surveys: Global Perspectives on the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders. 2008:91-113.
8. International Fetal and Newborn Growth Standards for the 21st Century Anthropometry Handbook [Electronic]. Oxford, UK2012. Available from : https://www.medscinet.net/Intergrowth/patientinfodocs/Anthropometry Handbook April 2012.pdf.
9. Bland JM, Altman DG. A note on the use of the intraclass correlation coefficient in the evaluation of agreement between two methods of measurement. Comput Biol Med. 1990;20(5):337-40. doi: 10.1016/0010-4825(90)90013-F.
10. Martin Bland J, Altman D. Statistical Methods for Assessing Agreement Between Two Methods of Clincal Measurement Lancet. 1986;327(8476):307-10. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.
11. Who Multicentre Growth Reference Study Group. WHO Child Growth Standards based on length/height, weight and age. Acta Pædiatr Suppl. 2006;95:76-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2006.tb02378.x.
12. Kochanska G, Murray KT, Harlan ET. Effortful control in early childhood: Continuity and change, antecedents, and implications for social development. Dev Psychol. 2000;36(2):220-32. doi: 10.1037/0012-16126.96.36.199
13. Huttenlocher J, Haight W, Bryk A, Seltzer M, Lyons T. Early vocabulary growth: Relation to language input and gender. Dev Psychol. 1991;27(2):236-48. doi: 10.1037/0012-16188.8.131.52
14. Thomas JR, French KE. Gender differences across age in motor performance: A meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 1985;98(2):260-82. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.260
15. Beaumont R, Sofronoff K. A multi‐component social skills intervention for children with Asperger syndrome: The Junior Detective Training Program. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2008;49(7):743-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01920.x
16. Rintala P, Pienimäki K, Ahonen T, Cantell M, Kooistra L. The effects of a psychomotor training programme on motor skill development in children with developmental language disorders. Hum Mov Sci. 1998;17(4–5):721-37. doi: 10.1016/S0167-9457(98)00021-9.
17. Monga S, Young A, Owens M. Evaluating a cognitive behavioral therapy group program for anxious five to seven year old children: a pilot study. Depress Anxiety. 2009;26(3):243-50. doi: 10.1002/da.20551