Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2020 / Cilt: 50 - Sayı: 4

Which Bayley-III cut-off values should be used in different developmental levels?

Pages
764–770
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Different Bayley-III cut-off scores should be used to define developmentaldelay levels.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aim: Latest version of Bayley Scales (Bayley-III) and its predecessor (BSID-II) are the most widely used standardizeddevelopmental tools in infancy and early childhood.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Recent studies showed that Bayley-III scores were higher than BSID-II in 18–24month-old and mostly premature infants.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Different Bayley-III cut-off scores should be used to define developmentaldelay levels.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background/aim: Latest version of Bayley Scales (Bayley-III) and its predecessor (BSID-II) are the most widely used standardizeddevelopmental tools in infancy and early childhood. Recent studies showed that Bayley-III scores were higher than BSID-II in 18–24month-old and mostly premature infants. We aimed to evaluate the generalization of inflated scores of Bayley-III to children aged 6–42months with different disease groups, and to find out which cut-off points should be used in Bayley-III to detect mild, moderate, andsevere developmental delay according to BSID-II standard cut-off points.Materials and methods: Two hundred and fifty-five children aged 6–42 months with different diseases and developmental levels wereadministered both the Bayley-III and BSID-II in the same session between 15 November 2017 and 15 April 2018.Results: The mean Bayley-III Cognitive Composite (CC) and Cognitive Language Composite (CLC) scores were respectively 13.1 ± 9.1and 8.6 ± 8 points higher than BSID-II Mental Development Index (MDI) scores (P < 0.001). The mean Bayley-III Motor Composite(MC) scores were 14.4 ± 10.5 points higher than BSID-II Psychomotor Developmental Index (PDI) scores (P < 0.001). Cognitive delaywas found in 126 (49.4%) and 59 (23.1%) children according to BSID-II MDI and Bayley-III CC scores, respectively. Motor delay wasfound in 174 (69.3%) and 86 (34.3%) children according to the BSID-II PDI and Bayley-III MC scores, respectively. Children had lesscognitive (48.6%) and motor delay (54.5%) according to Bayley-III scores. Bayley-III scores were significantly higher than BSID-IIscores for all ages (P < 0.001). According to ROC analysis the cut-off scores for mild, moderate, and severe delay were 92.5, 83.2, and71.2 for Bayley-III CLC; and 98.5, 86.5, and 74.5 for Bayley-III MC, respectively.Conclusion: Bayley-III scores should be interpreted carefully for all age ranges and different diagnosis. The risk for underestimation ofdevelopmental delays by Bayley-III should be kept in mind. Different Bayley-III cut-off scores should be used to define developmentaldelay levels.

🔖

Cite This Article

YAKUT, H. İ., ÇELİK, P., SUCAKLI, İ. A. (2022). Which Bayley-III cut-off values should be used in different developmental levels?. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 50 - Sayı: 4, 764–770. https://ajindex.com/articles/610048

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Bayley N. Manual for Bayley Scales of infant development. 1st ed. San Antonio, TX, USA: The Psychological Corporation, 1969
  2. Bayley N. Bayley Scales of Infant Development. 2nd ed. San Antonio, TX, USA: The Psychological Corporation, 1993
  3. Bayley N. Bayley Scales of infant and toddler development. 3rd ed. San Antonio, TX, USA: The Psychological Corporation, 2006
  4. Anderson PJ, De Luca CR, Hutchinson E, Roberts G, Doyle LW et al. Underestimation of developmental delay by the new Bayley-III Scale. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 2010; 164 (4): 352-356. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.20 5. Vohr BR, Stephens BE, Higgins RD, Bann CM, Hintz SR et al. Are outcomes of extremely preterm infants improving? Impact of Bayley assessment on outcomes. Journal of Pediatrics 2012; 161 (2): 222-228 e223. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2012.01.057 6. Jary S, Whitelaw A, Walloe L, Thoresen M. Comparison of Bayley-2 and Bayley-3 scores at 18 months in term infants following neonatal encephalopathy and therapeutic hypothermia. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 2013; 55 (11): 1053-1059. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12208 7. Johnson S, Moore T, Marlow N. Using the Bayley-III to assess neurodevelopmental delay: which cut-off should be used? Pediatric Research 2014; 75 (5): 670-674. doi: 10.1038/ pr.2014.10 8. Yi YG, Sung IY, Yuk JS. Comparison of Second and Third Editions of the Bayley Scales in Children With Suspected Developmental Delay. Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine 2018; 42 (2): 313-320. doi: 10.5535/arm.2018.42.2.313 9. Moore T, Johnson S, Haider S, Hennessy E, Marlow N. Relationship between test scores using the second and third editions of the Bayley Scales in extremely preterm children. Journal of Pediatrics 2012; 160 (4): 553-558. doi: 10.1016/j. jpeds.2011.09.047 10. Acton BV, Biggs WS, Creighton DE, Penner KA, Switzer HN et al. Overestimating neurodevelopment using the Bayley-III after early complex cardiac surgery. Pediatrics 2011; 128 (4): e794-800. doi: 10.1542/peds.2011-0331 11. Reuner G, Fields AC, Wittke A, Lopprich M, Pietz J. Comparison of the developmental tests Bayley-III and BayleyII in 7-month-old infants born preterm. European Journal of Pediatrics 2013; 172 (3): 393-400. doi: 10.1007/s00431-012- 1902-6 12. Sharp M, DeMauro SB. Counterbalanced comparison of the BSID-II and Bayley-III at eighteen to twenty-two months corrected age. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics 2017; 38 (5): 322-329. doi: 10.1097/ DBP.0000000000000441