Cited by 99Infant Development and Preterm CareCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

Assessments of sensory processing in infants: a systematic review

EELES, ABBEY L, SPITTLE, ALICIA J, ANDERSON, PETER J, BROWN, NISHA, LEE, KATHERINE J, BOYD, ROSLYN N, DOYLE, LEX W·2013·Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology

Abstract

Aim The aim of the study was to evaluate the psychometric properties and clinical use of assessments of sensory processing function, within the first 2 years of life, and to identify which assessment is the most appropriate and precise in measuring the construct of sensory processing. Method The literature was comprehensively searched, and assessments used to measure sensory processing in infancy were systematically selected and reviewed for clinical use, reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Results Thirty‐four assessments were identified; three met the predefined inclusion criteria. All discriminative assessments, the Sensory Rating Scale, and Infant/Toddler Sensory Profile are parent‐reported questionnaires and can be administered from birth up to 3 years of age. The Test of Sensory Function in Infants is a performance‐based assessment and is suitable for infants aged 4 to 18 months. Studies evaluating the psychometric properties of these three assessments differed in the properties addressed and reported poor to adequate reliability. Interpretation Selecting the most appropriate and precise assessment to measure sensory processing function in infancy will depend on the specific components of sensory processing that need to be evaluated, infant age, and what other sources of information are available about the infant’s development.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2012.04434.x

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
EELES, A. L., SPITTLE, A. J., ANDERSON, P. J., BROWN, N., LEE, K. J., BOYD, R. N., & DOYLE, L. W.
Affiliations
  • Murdoch Children's Research Institute (AU)
  • Royal Women's Hospital (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
EELES, ABBEY L
Venue
Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-11-15
Volume
55
Issue
4
Pages
314-326
ISSN
  • 0012-1622 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8749
OpenAlex
W2078955274
Cited by
99
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Cerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
sensory processing, infants, psychometric properties, reliability statistics, validity, responsiveness, parent questionnaires, performance-based assessment, infant development
MeSH terms
Child Behavior, Child Development, Developmental Disabilities, Child, Preschool, Fathers, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Mothers, Motor Skills, Neuropsychological Tests, Parents, Psychometrics, Psychomotor Performance, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sensation, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation, Infant Behavior, Motor Skills Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review