Single versus repeated assessments of infant abilities using the Bayley scales of infant development

Abstract

An analysis of the score differences and characteristics achieved by 9- and 15-month-old infants tested twice with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, one week apart, shows marked variations between what could be considered optimal estimates of ability and estimates of ability based on actual scores. There is approximately a 50% chance that an infant's actual Developmental Quotient from a single examination will differ from its optimal score by more than one standard deviation of the BSID. The fact that single test scores do not reliably estimate “true” capabilities reconfirms that a caveat be maintained concerning the use of single Bayley scores as baselines of longitudinal research or as outcome measures, but holds out the possibility that the usefulness of such scores as predictive of outcome measures can be improved over its present negligible status through repeated assessments.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.