
doi: 10.5546/aap.2013.476
INTRODUCTION The administration of the National Screening Test (PruebaNacional de Pesquisa, PRUNAPE), a tool which is effective to screen inapparent developmental disorders in children under 6 years old, requires adequate training, time, space and furniture. A simple questionnaire to help screen large population groups could be useful to identify children at risk. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the validity of the PRUNAPE pre-screening questionnaire (cuestionario PRUNAPE pre-pesquisa, CPPP) to identify children at risk of not passing the test. METHODS Fifty seven PRUNAPE milestones were transformed into questions; they were organized in fve questionnaires (one for each age group between 6 and 71 months old) with illustrative pictures. The study was performed in Florencio Varela and in the Health Promotion Unit of Hospital de Ninos "Ricardo Gutierrez" in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. In a sample of 533 healthy children and their mothers, of a low socio-economic level, the CPPP was consecutively: a) self-administered by each mother (CPPP-SA), b) by healthcare personnel (CPPP-HP), and fnally, c) the PRUNAPE test was administered to each child by qualifed professionals. Each step was performed by a different professional in a triple-blind fashion. When choosing the cutoff point, the positive predictive value (PPV) was prioritized to reach the least possible number of false positives. RESULTS For the CPPP-SA and the CPPP-HP, the overall results were, respectively: Cohen's kappa coeffcient: 0.23 and 0.28; sensitivity: 0.41 and 0.42; specifcity: 0.81 and 0.85; negative predictive value 0.57 and 0.59; and PPV 0.71 and 0.76. CONCLUSIONS The CPPP is a valid tool to identify children who most require the PRUNAPE to be administered.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
