HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cadman, D Articles by Ferguson, R Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cadman, D Articles by Ferguson, R

The usefulness of the Denver Developmental Screening Test to predict kindergarten problems in a general community population.

D Cadman, L W Chambers, S D Walter, W Feldman, K Smith and R Ferguson

The Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) was administered to 2,569 children five to seven months prior to starting kindergarten in September 1980 in a geographically well-defined community. The test was administered by trained public health nurses. At the end of the 1980-1981 school year, all 163 kindergarten teachers in the area completed a rating form for each child in their class. The rating form determined global ratings of: 1) learning abilities; 2) classroom behavior; 3) amount of special attention required; and 4) referrals to special education services outside the classroom. The specificity of the DDST in predicting kindergarten teacher ratings was 99 per cent for all areas. Test sensitivity varied from 5 per cent to 10 per cent in detecting problems in the four areas. The predictive values of an positive test varied from 31 per cent for behavior problems to 62 per cent for extra attention required in the classroom. Negative test predictive values varied from 79 per cent to 93 per cent. These results based on kindergarten teacher ratings suggest that, because of the low sensitivity and modest predictive value, the DDST may be relatively inefficient to use in a school entry screening program in a general community population of children.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Clemens, R. P. Doolittle, and M. Hoyle Kindergarten Health Assessment Reports: What Do Schools Really Learn from Them? Clinical Pediatrics, March 1, 2002; 41(2): 93 - 98. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. R Bergan, R. D Schwarz, and L. A Reddy Latent Structure Analysis of Classification Errors in Screening and Clinical Diagnosis: An Alternative to Classification Analysis Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 1999; 23(1): 69 - 86. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. L. Simner Canada's Reaction to Misleading Advertisements for Pre-School Screening Tests School Psychology International, August 1, 1994; 15(3): 277 - 286. [Abstract]