A multiphased cultural and contextual adaptation of the Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status tools for a low‐income community: A South African case study

Botes, Mignon; Linde, Jeannie van der; Swanepoel, De Wet

doi:10.1111/cch.13083

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The next step is to adapt the items identified by the community to create a version of the PEDS tools suitable for a low-income community. [26] Supplementary Fig. 1 (https:// www.samedical.org/file/2097) outlines the steps for the cultural adaption of the PEDS tools and highlights the importance of the caregiver perspectives on the cultural and linguistic appropriateness of the tools.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural and linguistic applicability of the English PEDS tools in a low-income community: A caregiver perspective

Botes,

Swanepoel,

Graham

et al. 2023

S Afr J Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Regular developmental surveillance using structured developmental screening tools is a proven way to effectively identify developmental delays and disabilities. Most screening tools are developed and standardised in high-income countries and then adapted and translated for low-and middle-income countries. However, cultural differences and viewpoints make it challenging to translate and adapt developmental screening tools for low-income communities.Objectives. To determine caregivers’ perspectives on linguistic and cultural appropriateness of the Parents’ Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS) and the PEDS: Developmental Milestones (DM) as a first step in the adaptation process for low-income communities in South Africa.Method. Participants (N=102) were selected using convenience sampling at an immunisation clinic. We employed a survey researchdesign. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative survey feedback survey was analysed using data-driven inductive methodology.Results. On the PEDS questionnaire, 38.2% of participants indicated the term ‘development’ on question 1 was not suitable; and 51%preferred the phrase ‘sometimes worry’ more than the phrase ‘have any concerns’ for questions 2 - 9. On the PEDS:DM, 58 of the 124questions were deemed difficult. Most questions were problematic owing to cultural or linguistic differences (49 questions), while 9questions were too difficult for the child’s age. The expressive language developmental domain had the most challenges.Conclusion. The present study relied on robust community participation, enabling community-led adaptation of the PEDS tools. Items on the tools were viewed solely from a community perspective, empowering the community to be ‘experts’ in this process, ensuring greater contextual relevance and applicability of the tools, as well as generalisability to similar low-income communities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%