The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Implementing Developmental Screening and Referrals: Lessons Learned From a National Project
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the degree to which a national sample of pediatric practices could implement American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommendations for developmental screening and referrals, and to identify factors that contributed to the successes and shortcomings of these efforts. BACKGROUND: In 2006, the AAP released a policy statement on developmental surveillance and screening that included an algorithm to aid practices in implementation. Simultaneously, the AAP launched a 9-month pilot project in which 17 diverse practices sought to implement the policy statement's recommendations. METHODS: Quantitative data from chart reviews were used to calculate rates of screening and referral. Qualitative data on practices' implementation efforts were collected through semistructured telephone interviews and inductively analyzed to generate key themes. RESULTS: Nearly all practices selected parent-completed screening instruments. Instrument selection was frequently driven by concerns regarding clinic flow. At the project's conclusion, practices reported screening more than 85% of patients presenting at recommended screening ages. They achieved this by dividing responsibilities among staff and actively monitoring implementation. Despite these efforts, many practices struggled during busy periods and times of staff turnover. Most practices were unable or unwilling to adhere to 3 specific AAP recommendations: to implement a 30-month visit; to administer a screen after surveillance suggested concern; and to submit simultaneous referrals both to medical subspecialists and local early-intervention programs. Overall, practices reported referring only 61% of children with failed screens. Many practices also struggled to track their referrals. Those that did found that many families did not follow through with recommended referrals. CONCLUSIONS: A diverse sample of practices successfully implemented developmental screening as recommended by the AAP. Practices were less successful in placing referrals and tracking those referrals. More attention needs to be paid to the referral process, and many practices may require separate implementation systems for screening and referrals.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“In some settings, screening programs have been criticized for identifying children with high likelihood of developmental delays without being able to ensure timely follow-up evaluation and services (e.g., King et al., 2010).”
From Navigating the Challenges: A Commentary on Barriers to Autism Screening in Childcare Centers (2026) · cites this paper as King et al., 2010
Citations
Cites
Why Don't Physicians Follow Clinical Practice Guidelines?: A Framework for Improvement
Cabana, M. D., Rand, C. S., Powe, N. R., Wu, A. W., Wilson, M. H., Abboud, P.-A. C., & Rubin, H. R. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.15.1458 · Cited by 6,677
From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development
(2000) · doi:10.17226/9824 · Cited by 4,484
Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis.
(1999) · PubMed Central · Cited by 4,133
From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development
Carey, W. B. (2001) · Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics · doi:10.1097/00004703-200104000-00011 · Cited by 2,678
Pediatrics, S. O. D. B. (2006) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1231 · Cited by 1,472
(1997) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 1,226
Qualitative methods: what are they and why use them?
Sofaer, S. (1999) · PubMed · Cited by 866
The Effectiveness of Early Intervention.
Guralnick, M. J. (1997) · Cited by 495
Internists' Attitudes about Clinical Practice Guidelines
Tunis, S., Hayward, R. S. A., Wilson, M. C., Rubin, H. R., Bass, E. B., Johnston, M., & Steinberg, E. P. (1994) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-120-11-199406010-00008 · Cited by 440
Luckey, D. W., & Pett, M. A. (1998) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2669654 · Cited by 394
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Bricker, 1999, Ages & Stages Questionnaires: A Parent-Completed, Child-Monitoring System
- Glascoe, 1997, Parents' Evaluations of Developmental Status
- Frankenburg, 1996, DENVER II Technical Manual
- Frankenburg, 1998, Prescreening Developmental Questionnaire (PDQ II)
- Nelson, 2006, Screening for speech and language delay in preschool children: systematic evidence review for the US Preventive Services Task Force [published correction appears in Pediatrics. 2006;117(6):2336–2337], Pediatrics, 117
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Marino, B. S., Lipkin, P. H., Newburger, J. W., Peacock, G., Gerdes, M., Gaynor, J. W., Mussatto, K. A., Uzark, K., Goldberg, C. S., Johnson, W. H., et al. (2012) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e318265ee8a · Cited by 1,608
Self-citationLipkin, P. H., Macias, M. M., COUNCIL ON CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES, S. O. D. A. B. P., Norwood, K. W., Brei, T. J., Davidson, L. F., Davis, B. E., Ellerbeck, K. A., Houtrow, A. J., Hyman, S. L., et al. (2020) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2019-3449 · Cited by 676
Self-citationEarly Screening of Autism Spectrum Disorder: Recommendations for Practice and Research
Zwaigenbaum, L., Bauman, M. L., FEIN, D. A., Pierce, K., Buie, T. M., Davis, P. A., Newschaffer, C. J., Robins, D. L., Wetherby, A. M., Choueiri, R., et al. (2015) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2014-3667d · Cited by 309
Trends in the Use of Standardized Tools for Developmental Screening in Early Childhood: 2002–2009
Radecki, L., Sand-Loud, N., O'Connor, K. G., Sharp, S., & Olson, L. M. (2011) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2010-2180 · Cited by 235
Universal newborn screening for congenital CMV infection: what is the evidence of potential benefit?
Cannon, M. J., Griffiths, P. D., Aston, V., & Rawlinson, W. D. (2014) · Reviews in Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/rmv.1790 · Cited by 234
“Some studies indicate that children with an identified at-risk condition or a clinical diagnosis have an earlier age of first concern from parents or caregivers, an earlier development of an Individual Family Service Program, and an earlier receipt of early intervention services [74–77].”
Metadata
- Authors
- King, T. M., Tandon, S. D., Macias, M. M., Healy, J. A., Duncan, P. M., Swigonski, N. L., Skipper, S. M., & Lipkin, P. H.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Medical University of South Carolina (US)
- American Academy of Pediatrics (US)
- University of Vermont (US)
- Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
- Kennedy Krieger Institute (US)
- Venue
- Pediatrics
- Publisher
- American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
- Published
- 2010-02-01
- Volume
- 125
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 350-360
- ISSN
- 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-4275
- OpenAlex
- W2067299533
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 25.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Center for Research Resources (KL2RR025006, K12RR017627)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Child and Adolescent Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Adolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
- Keywords
- developmental screening, child development monitoring, pediatric practice, American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement, early intervention programs, referral tracking, implementation barriers, employee turnover
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Child Development, Developmental Disabilities, Child, Preschool, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Mass Screening, Pediatrics, Primary Health Care, Referral and Consultation, United States, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Guideline Adherence
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
