0
Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¿µÀ¯¾Æ ¹ß´Þ¼±º°°Ë»ç¸¦ À§ÇÑ Ã¼Å©¸®½ºÆ® °³¹ß ¹× Ÿ´çµµ °ËÁ¤

Development & Validation of a Checklist for Infant and Child Developmental Screening

¾Æµ¿°£È£ÇÐȸÁö 2009³â 15±Ç 1È£ p.34 ~ 41
KMID : 0606120090150010034
ÁÖÇö¿Á ( Ju Hyeon-Ok ) - µ¿¾Æ´ëÇб³ °£È£Çаú

±è¼ÒÈñ ( Kim So-Hee ) - µ¿¾Æ´ëÇб³ °£È£Çаú
À̳»¿µ ( Lee Nae-Young ) - ½Å¶ó´ëÇб³ °£È£Çаú
¹ÚÀμ÷ ( Park In-Sook ) - ±èÇØ¿¬ÇռҾưú¹ß´ÞŬ¸®´Ð
À̼±¿Á ( Lee Sun-Ok ) - ½Å¶ó´ëÇб³ °£È£Çаú

Abstract

Purpose: In this study, a Checklist for Infant and Child Developmental Screening (CICDS) was designed for use by primary pediatric health care providers to identify infants and children with developmental delays.

Method: Each Item of the CICDS was constructed referring to existing tools. In 5 public health centers of B city, 500 infants and children were selected at the age of 2, 4, 6, 12, & 18 months and assessed between October and December 2006. CICDS and the Korea Denver II were compared to assesses the validity of the CICDS.

Results: The CICDS consisted of 30 items in 4 areas; Personal-social, Fine motor-adaptive, Language, Gross motor. The results of the CICDS correlated significantly with the result of Korea Denver II at each month of age. (r=0.19;
p<.01). Of the 500 infants and children, 148 were ¡°suspect¡± for development delays (sensitivity of 96%, specificity 73%). On the CICDS, 74.6% of children received same result as Denver II. In discriminant analysis, 89.9% of children were identified correctly by CICDS (p<.01).

Conclusion: CICDS could be a screening procedures to quickly and reliably identify infants with developmental delays. It also provides a mean of recording measurements of development characteristics.
KeyWords
¿µÀ¯¾Æ, ¹ß´Þ¼±º°°Ë»ç, µµ±¸°³¹ß
Growth and development, Validation Study, Infant, Child development
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
  
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
ÇмúÁøÈïÀç´Ü(KCI) KoreaMed