The Denver II: A Major Revision and Restandardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test

Abstract

Since the Denver Developmental Screening Test was first published 23 years ago, it has been utilized worldwide and restandardized in more than a dozen countries. Concerns raised through the years by test users about specific items and features of the Denver Developmental Screening Test, coupled with a need for more current norms, have prompted a major revision and restandardization of the test. For the revision, 336 potential items were administered to more than 2000 children. The average number of times each item was administered was 540. Using regression analysis, composite norms for the total sample and norms for subgroups (based on gender, ethnicity, maternal education, and place of residence), were used to determine new age norms. The final selection of the 125 Denver II items was based on the following criteria: ease of administration and scoring, item appeal to child and examiner, item test-retest and inter-rater reliability, minimal "refusal" scores, minimal "no opportunity" scores, minimal subgroup differences, and a smooth step-like progression of ages at which 90% of children could perform the tasks. The major differences between the Denver II and the Denver Developmental Screening Test are: 1) an 86% increase in language items; 2) two articulation items; 3) a new age scale; 4) a new category of item interpretation to identify milder delays; 6) a behavior rating scale; and 7) new training materials.

The ASQ and R-PDQ telephone-administered validation within the OTIS antidepressant in pregnancy study.

“…The R-PDQ (Frankenburg et al, 1987) assesses four aspects of development (gross motor, fine motor activity, personal-social, and language) for children from birth to 6 years of age. It is derived from the Denver Developmental Screening Test II (DDST-II) (Frankenburg, Dodds, Archer, Shapiro, & Bresnick, 1992). A child is considered as having a delay if he or she fails an item that 90% of children in the standardized sample are able to do at a younger age.…”

Successful pregnancy and breastfeeding in a woman with mucopolysaccharidosis type I while receiving laronidase enzyme replacement therapy

“…By six months, and until the end of the study, the infant was at or above the 50 th percentile for both weight and length. Denver II Development assessments [17] showed appropriate development for age. The boy, now 2.5 years old, has continued to develop normally.…”

“…The objectives are to determine if laronidase is present in the breast milk of postpartum women receiving laronidase, and to assess the effects of laronidase on the growth, development, and immunologic response of their breastfed infants. Mothers and their infants undergo periodic clinical, immunological and biochemical evaluations (Table 1) during the pregnancy and up to 12 months of life (if no antibodies are detected in the infant for three months), or [17] * Samples collected within 24 hours preceding a laronidase infusion and within 60 minutes of completing an infusion; **Obtained from umbilical cord blood at birth; ***Blood sample collection from infant is optional. IgG and IgM antibody titers were assessed by a direct colorimetric enzymelinked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using specific anti-human IgG or IgM as a detector reagent.…”

Pectoralis major muscle turnover flap reconstruction for treatment of deep sternal wound infection in infants and children

“…During the follow-up, there were no signs of chronic sternal infection, and all wounds healed well. All patients were between 25 to 75 percentile in their weight and height nomograms and appropriately developed for their age according to the Denver development scale [8]. In 3 patients,chest wall were mild asymmetry.There were no limitations in upper trunk or limb movements in all patients.…”