Stability of developmental status and risk of impairment at 24 and 36 months in late preterm infants

BackgroundFew studies investigated whether late preterm infants might have developmental delays in several domains in early life and how stable the lag in developmental status might be.AimWe aimed to examine the stability of potential delays across developmental domains at 24 and 36 months of age in late preterm (34°-36⁶ weeks) and term (≥37 weeks) children and whether the risk of delays remained high at 36 months.Study design, subjects, and outcome measureWe conducted a prospective cohort analysis of the children of pregnant women participating in the Vitamin Antenatal Asthma Reduction Trial (VDAART). 652 children who were prospectively followed up and had parent-completed Ages Stages Questionnaires (ASQ-3) questionnaires at both 24 and 36 months were analyzed to assess their domain-specific developmental status.Results6.61 % (42/635) of children had a late preterm birth. Developmental delays were stable between 24 and 36 months on all 5 domains for the children born preterm and on 4/5 domains for those born at term. The developmental domains with the status stability at 24 and 36 months in both late preterm and term children were the gross motor, communication, personal-social skills, and problem-solving. Late preterm children compared with term children remained at higher risk of delays at 36 months for gross motor, communication, and problem-solving skills (aOR = 4.54, 95 %CI: 1.81−10.79; aOR = 8.60, 95 %CI: 3.10−23.28 and aOR = 3.80, 95 %CI: 1.58−8.73, respectively).ConclusionLate preterm birth is associated with suboptimal development and stability in several domains at both 24 and 36 months and compared with term birth, requiring early monitoring and assessment of the developmental lag to avoid potential long-term implications.     

Psychometric evaluation of the Dutch translation of the Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering for adults (OASES-A-D)

The Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering for adults (OASES-A; [Yaruss and Quesal, 2006] and [Yaruss and Quesal, 2010]) is a patient-reported outcome measure that was designed to provide a comprehensive assessment of “the experience of the stuttering disorder from the perspective of individuals who stutter” (Yaruss & Quesal, 2006, p. 90). This paper reports on the translation process and evaluates the psychometric performance of a Dutch version of the OASES-A. Translation of the OASES-A into Dutch followed a standard forward and backward translation process. The Dutch OASES-A (OASES-A-D) was then administered to 138 adults who stutter. A subset of 91 respondents also evaluated their speech on a 10-point Likert scale. For another subset of 45 respondents, a clinician-based stuttering severity rating on a 5-point Likert scale was available. Thirty-two of the respondents also completed the Dutch S-24 scale (Brutten & Vanryckeghem, 2003). The OASES-A-D showed acceptable item properties. No ceiling effects were observed. For 30 out of 100 items, most of which were in Section IV (Quality of Life), floor effects were observed. Cronbach's α coefficients for all sections and subsections surpassed the 0.70 criterion of good internal consistency and reliability. Concurrent validity was moderate to high. Construct validity was confirmed by distinct scores on the OASES-A-D for groups with different levels of stuttering severity as rated by the speakers themselves or by clinicians. These results suggest that the OASES-A-D is a reliable and valid measure that can be used to assess the impact of stuttering on Dutch adults who stutter.Educational objectives: The reader will be able to: (a) describe the purpose of the Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering for adults (OASES-A) measurement tool; (b) summarize the translation process used in creating the Dutch version of the OASES-A (OASES-A-D); (c) evaluate the psychometric properties of the OASES-A-D; and (d) compare the psychometric properties of the OASES-A-D with those of the original American English OASES-A.     

The empirical relationships between standardized measures of religiosity and personality/mental health

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between standardized, factor-based measures of religiosity and personality/mental health. In a sample of 471 self-identified Christian subjects, 303 females and 168 males, 79 non-psychotic psychiatric in-patients and 392 non-patients, personal extrinsicness was partially positively correlated with the BCI Obsessive score. In multiple regression analyses some of the factor-based religious orientation indices related differently to the BCI Oral, Obsessive and Hysterical Scales and the SCL-90 Global Symptom Index as dependent variables. The religious orientations explained 8.8% of the variance of the BCI Oral Score, 4.2% of the BCI Obsessive score, 3.3% of the BCI Hysterical score, and 12.3% of the SCL-90 Global Symptom Index score. Of the doctrinal belief and morality indices only Moral conservatism was significantly related to the BCI Hysterical score, and then negatively.     

Affordances in the home environment for motor development: Validity and reliability for the use in daycare setting

The range of stimuli provided by physical space, toys and care practices contributes to the motor, cognitive and social development of children. However, assessing the quality of child education environments is a challenge, and can be considered a health promotion initiative. This study investigated the validity of the criterion, content, construct and reliability of the Affordances in the Home Environment for Motor Development – Infant Scale (AHEMD-IS), version 3–18 months, for the use in daycare settings. Content validation was conducted with the participation of seven motor development and health care experts; and, face validity by 20 specialists in health and education. The results indicate the suitability of the adapted AHEMD-IS, evidencing its validity for the daycare setting a potential tool to assess the opportunities that the collective context offers to child development.     

The Vancouver Obsessional Compulsive Inventory (VOCI)

The original Maudsley Obsessional Compulsive Inventory (MOCI) has been widely used and is considered to be one of the best available self-report instruments for measuring observable obsessive-compulsive problems such as washing and checking. However, it has several limitations and requires updating. Our revision of the MOCI, the Vancouver Obsessional Compulsive Inventory (VOCI), was designed to provide assessment of a range of obsessions, compulsions, avoidance behaviour, and personality characteristics of known or theoretical importance in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The development of the VOCI is described, and we provide evidence of its reliability and validity. Our findings in samples of people with OCD, people with other anxiety disorders or depression, community adults, and undergraduate students suggest that the VOCI is a promising new measure. We anticipate that, like its predecessor, the VOCI will have widespread use in both research and clinical settings.     

Inferential confusion in obsessive-compulsive disorder: the inferential confusion questionnaire

The current article represents the further validation of the construct of inferential confusion amongst clinical samples. Inferential confusion is proposed to be a meta-cognitive confusion particularly relevant to obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) that leads a person to confuse an imagined possibility with an actual probability. As such, it conceptualizes OCD as a form of belief disorder similar to a delusion or overvalued idea that is a product of distorted reasoning processes. In contrast, other cognitive models of OCD emphasize a phobic model of development in OCD, and thus consider the exaggerated interpretation of intrusions as an essential element in OCD. The present study administered a revised version of the Inferential Confusion Questionnaire, and the Obsessive Belief Questionnaire (OBQ), to a total of 183 participants in three clinical groups and a non-clinical control group. Results suggest that OCD, at least in part, follows a non-phobic model of development with inferential confusion significantly related to obsessive-compulsive symptoms independently of cognitive domains as measured by the OBQ, and mood states. Further, scores on inferential confusion were particularly high in those with OCD and delusional disorder as compared to anxious and non-clinical controls.     

Three traditional and three new childhood anxiety questionnaires: their reliability and validity in a normal adolescent sample

The current study examined the psychometrics of three traditional [i.e., the trait anxiety version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC), the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS), and the Fear Survey Schedule for Children - Revised (FSSC-R)] and three new childhood anxiety scales [the Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children (MASC), the Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders (SCARED), and the Spence Children's Anxiety Scale (SCAS)] in a large sample of normal adolescents (N=521). Childhood anxiety scales were generally found to be reliable in terms of internal consistency. Furthermore, evidence was obtained for the convergent and divergent validity of the various anxiety questionnaires. That is, anxiety questionnaire scores were found to be substantially intercorrelated. Particularly strong associations were found between total scores of the STAIC and the RCMAS, total scores of the SCARED and the SCAS, and between subscales that intend to measure specific categories of anxiety symptoms. Childhood anxiety questionnaires were substantially connected to an index of depression, although correlations among anxiety questionnaires were generally higher than those between anxiety scales and a measure of depression.     

On-line questionnaire completion time and personality test scores

Participants completed two well established questionnaires on line (HPI: Hogan Personality Inventory; and the HDS: Hogan Developmental Survey). Time taken to complete each study was correlated with scale scores from both questionnaires including the occupational scales derived from the HPI. Those who scored higher on Adjustment (Stability), and Prudence (Conscientiousness) but lower on Learning Approach took longer to complete the test. Those who scored higher on Stress Tolerance and Reliability took significantly longer than those with low scores on these measures. With only the exception of Diligent and Dutiful all correlations between Dark Side variables and time taken were negative, particularly Leisurely, Excitable and Imaginative. Regression showed that up to 6% of the time taken variance could be accounted for. Implications for measurement were considered.