CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 41Early Childhood Education and DevelopmentChild and Adolescent HealthDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

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

Cadman, D, Chambers, L W, Walter, S D, Feldman, W, Smith, K, Ferguson, R·1984·American Journal of Public Health
DOI 10.2105/ajph.74.10.1093
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2105/ajph.74.10.1093

Cites

12 of 12 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?

  • Mixed results were found for the SDQ, DDST, and GLS, with sensitivity values of 31%, 44%, and 67.4%, and PPV values of 31%, 41%, and 31.5%, respectively, which were unsatisfactory.

    “Mixed results were found also for the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) [118], the Denver Developmental Screening Test (DDST) [119,120], and the General Language Screen (GLS) [121] for which both sensitivity values (31%, 44%, and 67.4%, respectively) and PPV values (31%, 41%, and 31.5%, respectively) were particularly unsatisfactory”

    From Developmental Language Disorder: Early Predictors, Age for the Diagnosis, and Diagnostic Tools. A Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [120]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cadman, D., Chambers, L. W., Walter, S. D., Feldman, W., Smith, K., & Ferguson, R.
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Publisher
American Public Health Association
Published
1984-10
Volume
74
Issue
10
Pages
1093-1097
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
DOI
10.2105/ajph.74.10.1093
OpenAlex
W1972284123
Cited by
41
References
12
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
22.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Brown University
  • Center for Alcohol Studies
  • Ministère de l’Éducation, Gouvernement de l’Ontario
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Child and Adolescent Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
Denver Developmental Screening Test, school entry screening, kindergarten readiness, developmental screening, predictive validity, sensitivity and specificity, teacher ratings, learning ability, classroom behavior, special education referral, public health nursing, community children
MeSH terms
Developmental Disabilities, Child, Preschool, Education, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Faculty, Female, Humans, Male, Ontario, Psychological Tests, Random Allocation

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