TY - JOUR
T1 - Validity of the Ten Questions screen for childhood disability
T2 - Results from population-based studies in Bangladesh, Jamaica, and Pakistan
AU - Durkin, Maureen S.
AU - Davidson, Leslie L.
AU - Desai, Patricia
AU - Hasan, Z. Meher
AU - Khan, Naila
AU - Shrout, Patrick E.
AU - Thorbur, Marigold J.
AU - Wang, Wei
AU - Z Aman, Sultana S.
PY - 1994/5
Y1 - 1994/5
N2 - An international study to validate the Ten Questions screen for serious childhood disability was undertaken in communities in Bangladesh, Jamaica, and Pakistan, where community workers screened more than 22,000 children ages 2–9 years. All children who screened positive, as well as random samples of those who screened negative, were referred for clinical evaluations. Applying comparable diagnostic criteria, the sensitivity of the screen for serious cognitive, motor, and seizure disabilities is acceptable (80–100%) in all three populations, whereas the positive predictive values range from 3 to 15%. These results confirm the usefulness of the Ten Questions as a low-cost and rapid screen for these disabilities, although not for vision and hearing disabilities, in populations where few affected children have previously been identified and treated. They also show that the value of the Ten Questions for identifying disability in underserved populations is limited to that of a screen; more thorough evaluations of children screened positive are necessary to distinguish true- from false-positive results and to identify the nature of the disability if present.
AB - An international study to validate the Ten Questions screen for serious childhood disability was undertaken in communities in Bangladesh, Jamaica, and Pakistan, where community workers screened more than 22,000 children ages 2–9 years. All children who screened positive, as well as random samples of those who screened negative, were referred for clinical evaluations. Applying comparable diagnostic criteria, the sensitivity of the screen for serious cognitive, motor, and seizure disabilities is acceptable (80–100%) in all three populations, whereas the positive predictive values range from 3 to 15%. These results confirm the usefulness of the Ten Questions as a low-cost and rapid screen for these disabilities, although not for vision and hearing disabilities, in populations where few affected children have previously been identified and treated. They also show that the value of the Ten Questions for identifying disability in underserved populations is limited to that of a screen; more thorough evaluations of children screened positive are necessary to distinguish true- from false-positive results and to identify the nature of the disability if present.
KW - Child development disorders
KW - Cross-cultural comparison
KW - Disability
KW - Epidemiologic methods
KW - Predictive value of tests
KW - Questionnaires
KW - Reproducibility of results
KW - Screening
KW - Sensitivity
KW - Specificity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028183028&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028183028&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/00001648-199405000-00005
DO - 10.1097/00001648-199405000-00005
M3 - Article
C2 - 7518697
AN - SCOPUS:0028183028
VL - 5
SP - 283
EP - 289
JO - Epidemiology
JF - Epidemiology
SN - 1044-3983
IS - 3
ER -