COA At-a-Glance
Evidence of cognitive interviewing of draft instrument in target patient population
Evidence of internal consistency
Evidence of test-retest or inter-rater reliability
Evidence of concurrent validity
Evidence of known-groups validity
Evidence of ability to detect change over time
Evidence of responder thresholds
Inclusion of the COA in product labelling
- Overview
- Content Validity
- Reliability
- Validity
- Ability to Detect Change
- Responder Thresholds
- Reference(s) of development / validation
- Inclusion of the COA in product labelling
- Existence of Scoring / Interpretation / User Manual
- Original language and translations
- References of translations
- Authors and contact information
- Condition of use: copyright
- Website
- Review copy
Overview
Instrument Name: Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Fourth Edition
Abbreviation: Bayley™-4
Points for Consideration:
Highly used as a discriminative assessment. Not necessarily evaluative - more research needed.
Description of Tool:
The Bayley-4 is a ClinRO measure designed to assess functional and cognitive abilities in infants from 1 to 42 months. This version of the tool is most commonly deployed in clinical trial settings and clinical practice.
Other Related Tools (if applicable):
Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition
Minimum Qualification Required by COA Administrator: MA or BA
Comment:
Bayley-4 was developed from Bayley-III
Year: 2019
Objective of Development:
To identify potential delays in children and get interventions in place early on
Population of Development: Age range (therapeutic indication):
16 days to 42 months (Generic for Mental Disorders)
Pediatric Population(s) in which COA has been used:
Congenital, Hereditary and neonatal diseases and Abnormalities; Nervous system diseases
COA type: PerfO
Number of Items Not reported
Mode of Administration: Clinician-rated
Data Collection Mode:
Time for Completion: 30 to 70 minutes (depending upon age of child)
Response Scales: Not reported
Summary of Scoring:
Available Scores:
Subtest level scaled scores, domain level composite scores, percentile ranks, confidence intervals, developmental age equivalents, and growth scale values (score ranges not reported)
Weighting: Not reported
Score Interpretation:
Higher score= Better performance
Content Validity
Evidence of Literature Review: None identified
Evidence of Instrument Review: Yes
Evidence of Clinical or Expert Input: Yes
Evidence of concept elicitation in target patient population: None identified
Evidence of a Saturation Grid: None identified
Evidence for Selection of Data Collection Method: None identified
Recall/Observation Period: Present time
Evidence for Selection of Reponse Options: None identified
Evidence of cognitive interviewing of draft instrument in target patient population: None identified
Evidence of Preliminary Scoring of Items and Domains: None identified
Evidence related to respondent and administrator burden: Yes
Evidence of a Conceptual Framework: None identified
Evidence of an item-tracking matrix: None identified
Evidence related to item selection: None identified
Evidence of re-testing the final version: None identified
Reliability
Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha): Yes
Evidence of internal consistency: Available on Pearson website
Test-retest Reliability (ICC):
Pearson Website
Correlation coefficient: Not stated
Adaptive behavior: 0.72-0.87
Was a definition of stability applied to identify stable patients: Not stated
Time frame or interval between the two administrations: Not stated
Population/Disease: Not reported
Inter-rater/ inter-interviewer reliability (kappa):
Pearson Website: Correlation coefficient: Not stated Adaptive behavior: 0.67-0.81 (Method Not specified) Population/Disease: Not reported
Evidence of test-retest or inter-rater reliability: Yes
Validity
Concurrent validity (convergent, divergent):
None identified
Known-group validity:
None identified
Evidence of Translatability Assessment: None identified
Evidence related to missing data: None identified
Evidence for Selection of Recall Period: None identified
Evidence of Administration Instructions and Training Provided: Yes
Evidence of concurrent validity: None identified
Evidence of known-groups validity: None identified
Evidence of ability to detect change over time: None identified
Ability to Detect Change
Ability to detect change (Responsiveness):
None identified
Responder Thresholds
Responder Thresholds:
None identified
Evidence of responder thresholds: None identified
Reference(s) of development / validation
Pearson’s Clinical Assessment group. Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development™, Fourth Edition (Bayley™-4) [Internet]. Canada: Pearson; Consulted on March 23rd. Available from: https://www.pearsonclinical.ca/en/products/product-master.html/item-595#:~:text=The%20Bayley%20Scales%20of%20Infant,Q%2DGlobal%C2%AE%20software%20system.
Pearson’s Clinical Assessment group. Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development™, Fourth Edition (Bayley™-4) [Internet]. Canada: Pearson; Consulted on March 23rd. Available from: https://www.pearsonclinical.ca/content/dam/school/global/clinical/canada/programs/bayley/19-02-Bayley-3-to-4-Comparison.pdf
Inclusion of the COA in product labelling
None identified
Existence of Scoring / Interpretation / User Manual
Yes
Original language and translations
Original Language: English for the USA
References of translations
Bayley N. Aylward GP
Contact information
Pearson Assessment
19500 Bulverde Rd
San Antonio, TX 78259-3701
USA
Elizabeth Werner and Dr. Paul Williams from Pearson Research Services
E-mail: research.licensing@pearson.com
Condition of use: copyright
Please contact Pearson Assessment, Inc
Website
https://www.pearsonclinical.ca/store/caassessments/en/Store/Professional-Assessments/Developmental-Early-Childhood/Development/Bayley-Scales-of-Infant-and-Toddler-Development-%7C-Fourth-Edition/p/P100008220.html#:~:text=The%20Bayley%20Scales%20of%20Infant,Q%2DGlobal%C2%AE%20software%20system.
Review copy
None identified