Evidências de validade de critério concorrente e preditiva do Instrumento de Rastreio da Comunicação de Crianças de 0 a 36 meses (IRC-36)
Evidence of concurrent and predictive criterion validity of the Child Communication Screening Instrument from 0 to 36 months (IRC-36)
Dayanne Priscila Rodrigues de Almeida; Ana Augusta de Andrade Cordeiro; Larissa Nadjara Alves Almeida; Camila Arruda Manchester de Queiroga; Bianca Arruda Manchester de Queiroga
Resumo
Palavras-chave
Abstract
Purpose: To determine evidence of concurrent and predictive criterion validity of the Communication Screening Instrument for children aged 0 to 36 months (IRC-36).
Methods: 78 parents/guardians of children who attend the childcare service of the Family Health Centers participated in the research, in addition to 33 children aged between 0 and 36 months, invited to the second stage of the study. In its first stage, 13 health professionals were trained to apply the IRC-36 to the children’s parents/guardians. In the second moment, the parents responded to a new IRC-36 application, and the children were evaluated with Denver II.
Results: IRC-36 correlated with Denver II in more than half of the cases, confirming the instrument’s concurrent criterion validity. IRC-36 results in the first stage did not significantly correlate with Denver II. The instrument’s cutoff value was 12, which is the reference value between children at risk and not at risk of communication disorders. The instrument had high sensitivity and an accuracy value within the recommended levels. The occurrence of risk of communication changes was higher in the second IRC-36 application.
Conclusion: The study presented evidence of concurrent criterion validity, indicating that the instrument has evidence of accuracy and validity measures to screen communication in children aged 0 to 36 months, being able to identify the risk for communication disorders
Keywords
References
1 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Política Nacional de Atenção Integral à Saúde da Criança. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2018.
2 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Caderneta da Criança. 2. ed. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2020.
3 Holzinger D, Weber C, Barbaresi W, Beitel C, Fellinger J. Language screening in 3-year-olds: development and validation of a feasible and effective instrument for pediatric primary care. Front Pediatr. 2021;9:752141.
4 Barbosa ALA, Soares HBA, Azoni CAS. Construção de um instrumento de triagem do vocabulário para crianças entre 3 e 7 anos. Audiol Commun Res. 2019;24:e2131.
5 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Atenção à Saúde. Departamento de Atenção Básica. Cadernos de Atenção Primária: Rastreamento. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2010. (Série A. Normas e Manuais Técnicos).
6 Lamego DTC, Moreira MCN, Bastos OM. Diretrizes para a saúde da criança: o desenvolvimento da linguagem em foco. Cien Saude Colet. 2018;23(9):3095-106.
7 Pernambuco LA, Magalhães HV Jr. Aspectos epidemiológicos da disfagia orofaríngea. In: Marchesan IQ, Silva HJ, Tomé MC, editors. Tratado de Especialidades em Fonoaudiologia. São Paulo: Guanabara Kooagan; 2014. p. 171-178.
8 Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB, Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB. Propriedades psicométricas na avaliação de instrumentos: avaliação da confiabilidade e da validade. Epidemiol Serv Saude. 2017;26(3):649-59.
9 Ceron MI, Gubiani NB, Oliveira CR, Keske-Soares M. Evidências de validade e fidedignidade de um instrumento de avaliação fonológica. CoDAS. 2018;30(3):e20170180.
10 Pernambuco L, Espelt A, Magalhães HV Jr, Lima KC. Recommendations for elaboration, transcultural adaptation and valitation process of tests in speech, hearing and language pathology. CoDAS. 2017;29(3):e20160217. PMid:28614460.
11 Queiroga CAM. Explorações Psicométricas de um Instrumento de Rastreio dos Marcos de Desenvolvimento da Comunicação de Crianças de 0 a 36 Meses [Dissertação]. Recife: Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; 2019.
12 Pasquali L. Instrumentação psicológica: fundamentos e práticas. Porto Alegre: ArtMed Editora; 2010
13 DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44(3):837-45.
14 Albuquerque KA, Cunha ACB. Novas tendências em instrumentos para triagem do desenvolvimento infantil no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática. J Hum Growth Dev. 2020;30(2):188-96.
15 Altafim ER, McCoy DC, Brentani A, Escobar AM, Grisi SJ, Fink G. Measuring early childhood development in Brazil: validation of the Caregiver Reported Early Development Instruments (CREDI). J Pediatr (Rio J). 2020;96(1):66-75.
16 Sabatés AL, Lamônica DAC, Perissinoto J, Brêtas JS, Silva MGB, Rezende MA, et al. Teste de triagem do desenvolvimento Denver II: adaptação transcultural para a criança brasileira. Com autorização do autor Frankenburg WK. São Paulo: Hogrefe; 2013.
17 Boo FL, Mateus MC, Sabatés AL. Initial psychometric properties of the Denver II in a sample from Northeast Brazil. Infant Behav Dev. 2020;58:101391.
18 Araújo LA, Veloso CF, Souza MC, Azevedo JMC, Tarro G. The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on child growth and development: a systematic review. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2021;97(4):369-77.
19 Pinheiro GEW, Azambuja MS, Bonamigo AW. Facilidades e dificuldades vivenciadas na Educação Permanente em Saúde, na Estratégia Saúde da Família. Saúde Debate. 2018;42(4):187-97.
20 Wilkinson CL, Wilkinson MJ, Lucarelli J, Fogler JM, Becker RE, Huntington N. Quantitative evaluation of content and age concordance across developmental milestone checklists. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2019;40(7):511-8.
21 Visser-Bochane M, Luinge M, Dieleman L, van der Schans C, Reijneveld S. The Dutch well child language screening protocol for 2-year-old children was valid for detecting current and later language problems. Acta Paediatr. 2021;110(2):556-62.
22 Polo TCF, Miot HA. Aplicações da curva ROC em estudos clínicos e experimentais. J Vasc Bras. 2020;19:e20200186.
23 Sabatés AL. Denver II: teste de triagem do desenvolvimento: manual de treinamento. São Paulo: Hogrefe; 2018.
24 Conroy K, Rea C, Kovacikova GI, Sprecher E, Reisinger E, Durant H, et al. Ensuring timely connection to early intervention for young children with developmental delays. Pediatrics. 2018;142(1):e20174017.
25 Mélo TR, Lucchesi VO, Robeiro EJF Jr, Signorelli LC. Characterization of neuropsychomotor and language development of children receiving care from groups at an extended Family Health Care Center: an interprofessional approach. Rev CEFAC. 2020;22(3):1-10.
26 Oliveira AC, César CPHAR, Matos GG, Passos PS, Pereira LD, Alves T, et al. Hearing, language, motor and social skills in the child development: a screening proposal. Rev CEFAC. 2018;20(2):218-27.
27 Araujo LB, Novakoski KRM, Bastos MST, Mélo TR. Characterization of the neuropsychomotor development of children up to three years old: the ICF model in the context of the Family Health Support Center. Cadernos Brasileiros de Terapia Ocupacional. 2018;26(3):538-57.
28 Silva REG, Pereira C, Silva DF, Carvalho ROR. Avaliação do desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor em crianças de 4 meses a 3 anos de duas creches na cidade de Porto Velho – RO. South Am J Basic Educ Tech Technol. 2017;4(1):106-17.
29 Soares ACC, Silva K, Zuanetti PA. Variáveis de risco para o desenvolvimento da linguagem associadas à prematuridade. Audiol Commun Res. 2017;22(0):1745.
30 Sunderajan T, Kanhere SV. Speech and language delay in children: prevalence and risk factors. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019;8(5):1642-6.
31 Snowling MJ, Duff FJ, Nash HM, Hulme C. Language profiles and literacy outcomes of children with resolving, emerging, or persisting language impairments. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2016;57(12):1360-9.
Submitted date:
08/25/2022
Accepted date:
05/12/2023
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email