Search

This study aimed to examine the ability of the Quick Neurological Screening Test QNST II) (Mutti et al., 1998) to discriminate between children with and without perceptual-motor deficits and to further clarify its psychometric characteristics. Ninety-four children aged six to seven years were tested on the QNST-II. Out of this pool of subjects, 63 children had perceptual-motor deficits and 31 were typical controls. The children with perceptual-motor deficits scored significantly lower than the control children on the total score and on each of the subtest' s scores of the QNST II. Inter-rater reliability indicated a high degree of correlation between both evaluators' total scores of the QNST II. In terms of the test' s sensitivity and specificity, QNST II scores correctly classified 97% of the children with perceptual-motor deficits and 84% of the children from the control group. The findings of this study support the capability of the QNST II to discriminate between children with perceptual-motor deficits and typical children; thereby suggesting its usefulness as a screening measure to identify children at risk for difficulties in school performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to investigate the construct validity of the Miller Assessment for Preschoolers (MAP) and the Pediatric Examination of Educational Readiness (PEER), two assessment tools that occupational therapists and physical therapists can use for early identification of children with developmental disabilities. The sample included 84 Israeli children who were tested on the MAP (42 children with pre-academic problems and 42 typically developing children), and 70 children who were tested on the PEER (35 children with pre-academic problems and 35 typically developing children). Out of this pool of subjects, 30 typically developing children and 30 children with pre-academic problems were tested on both tests and the results were used for additional data analysis. We found differences between the groups' MAP and PEER total scores as well as their developmental indices scores. Children with pre-academic problems scored lower. The supplementary behavioral observations of the tests yielded less definite results. A strong correlation existed between the total scores of the MAP and the PEER, and the total scores of the tests correlated significantly with each of the sub-scores of the other test. The findings support the construct validity of both tests, thereby suggesting that either test can be used to identify children with pre-academic problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]