Bayley Scale of Infant Development-III (BSID-III)

Posted on: March 4, 2016 | By: lboyd3 | Filed under: Bayley Scales of Infant Motor Development (BSID-II, III, IV)

Some information has been updated from last years post. Updated information is in bold italics.

  • Descriptive Information
    • Title-Bayley Scale of Infant Development, Edition-3, Dates of Publication in 2005. BSID-II from 1993.
    • Author– Nancy Bayley PhD in psychology.
    • Source (publisher or distributor, address)-Pearsonclinical.com
    • Costs (booklets, forms, kit)*-range from $1350 for Comprehensive Kit and Screening Test Kit Combo to $1050 for the Complete Kit. Able to purchase individual items as well on the website.
    • Purpose*– to measure developmental delays in the very young and non-verbal children.
    • Type of Test– screening tool.
    • Target Population and Ages– down syndrome, pervasive developmental disorder, CP, specific or suspected language impairment, asphyxiation at birth, prenatal alcohol exposure, small for gestational age, premature or low birth weight, or other children at risk for developmental delays. For ages 1-42 months.
    • Time Requirements – Administration and Scoring-30-90 minutes.
  • Test Administration
    • Administration-2 questionnaires for social-emotional and adaptive behavior(using ABAS-II) and 3 sections scored by examiner(cognitive, language, and motor).
    • Scoring -0 or 1 depending on if the child is able to perform the activity for cognitive, motor(fine and gross subscales), and language(expressive and receptive subscales) scored by examiner. Social-emotional and adaptive questionnaires filled out by parent/caregiver with response options for the Social-emotional questionnaire including 0 (can’t tell), 1 (none of the time), 2 (some of the time), 3 (half of the time), 4 (most of the time), 5 (all of the time) and response options for the adaptive questionnaire including 0 (is not able), 1 (never when needed), 2 (sometimes when needed), and 3 (always when needed). No MCID due to this being a screening tool.
    • Type of information, resulting from testing-normative data, percentile ranks, qualitative description, 95% confidence interval, standard scores, age equivalents, with cut scores, T scores, and a graph report.
    • Environment for Testing– single room for quiet environment with minimal distractions and clean mat for motor activities.
    • Equipment and Materials Needed-BSID-III kit including administration manual, technical manual, motor, language, and cognitive record forms, social-emotional and adaptive questionnaires, observation checklist, caregiver report form, scoring DVD, administration DVD, stimulus book, 33mm bottle with lid, 5 by 7 mirror, 4 inch ball, 4 small and 2 medium blocks, red blocks, blocks with holes, doll, ducks, glitter bracelet, story book, stepping path, small drawstring bag, puzzles, picture book, oval shoe lace, memory cards, lacing card, and other component items that are available for purchase. Also needed are a table, chair, and area for motor tasks.
    • Examiner Qualifications –level C: doctorate in psychology or education, licensure in related field, or certification in professional organization such as APA, NASP, NAN, or INS.
    • Psychometric Characteristics* – new scoring used to extend floor and ceiling effects to better measure and categorize developmental delays. New version attempting to eliminate all biases and datedness to ensure clinical utility of this screening tool.
    • Standardization/normative data– normative data found for the Cognitive, Motor, and Language scales of the BSID-III in 2004 using 1700 children between age 16 days and 43 months 15 days in the US. Standardization of the social emotional scale from a sample of 456 children. Standardization of the adaptive behavior scale from a sample of 1,350 children, aged 0-71 months. 
    • Evidence of Reliability– easily reproduced due to ease of scoring from 0-1 depending on completion/incompletion of task. Reliability coefficients for the cognitive, motor, and language scales ranged from .91 to .93. The youngest age group demonstrated the lowest reliability coefficient (.71) for the specific subtests. For all of the age groups, the average test-retest stability coefficients were found to be .80 or greater. For the social emotional component, coefficients ranged from .76 to .94. For adaptive behavior component, coefficients ranged from .79 to .98. Of note, stability coefficients for the adaptive behavior component increased with increasing age. Inter-rater reliability ranged from .59 to .82.
    • Evidence of Validity– article states good validity of the BSID-III at 2-4 years in preterm children. Predictive validity at .81 who stayed in same developmental classification (normal, mild, moderate, severe delayed). Another website states good convergent and divergent validity. It states this test has strong correlations with the WPPSI-III, PLS-4, and PDMS-2. Unable to compare scores from BSID-II and BSID-III due to different scoring system. Discriminative to determine if a child is developmentally delayed or not based of age referenced normative data.
  • Summary Comments*
    • Strengths-Ideal for use when you suspect delays or problems in early development, determines the need for further in-depth assessment, indicates strengths, weaknesses, and competencies so that parents and professionals can properly plan for the child, aligns with IDEA requirements for support and intervention, excellent for use in cross-disciplinary teams, and allows for more caregiver involvement in test items.
    • Weaknesses– expensive and time consuming. Reliability is lower for younger children (0-6 months).
    • Clinical Applications– able to create goals easily from scoring items that child in unable to perform, observe of the child moves and responds with language and cognition, able to distinguish fine and gross motor function deficits and employ interventions appropriately, able to select services in accordance with IDEA.

References:

  • http://www.pearsonclinical.com/childhood/products/100000123/bayley-scales-of-infant-and-toddler-development-third-edition-bayley-iii.html#tab-details
  • therapybc.com
  • Bode MM, D’Eugenio DB, Mettelman BB, Gross SJ. Predictive validity of the Bayley, Third Edition at 2 years for intelligence quotient at 4 years in preterm infants. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2014 Nov-Dec;35(9):570-5.
  • Albers CA, Grieve AJ. Test Review of Bayley, N. (2006). Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development – Third Edition. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment. J Psychoeduc Assess. 2007;25(2):180-190.

Article Summary:

Connolly AM, Florence JM, Cradock MM, et al. One year outcome of boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy using the Bayley-III scales of infant and toddler development. Pediatr Neurol. 2014;50(6):557-563.

The main purpose of this multi-center, follow-up outcome assessment study was to use the Bayley III to examine the changes in performance over time that may be seen in young boys with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, when compared with young, healthy boys. In doing so, the authors performed both a 6-month and 12-month follow up on boys with DMD whom they examined in their original “baseline” study from 2013. At the 6-month follow up, 19 (age 1.9 +/- 0.8 years) of the original 24 boys returned for evaluation with the Bayley III; at the 12-month follow up, 12 (age 1.5 +/- 0.8 years) of the original 24 returned. During both of these follow ups, each boy was examined for the cognitive, language, and motor scales of the Bayley III, and the parents of the boys completed the Adaptive Behavioral Subtest and the Social-Emotional Scale. While the authors’ original study demonstrated significant differences between the boys with DMD and healthy boys for all areas of the Bayley III, the only area of the Bayley III that changed significantly (improvement) over time for the DMD boys was fine motor skills at the 12-month follow up (p=.05). However, based on the results showing a trend for decreasing gross motor skills over time in the DMD boys, the authors conclude that young boys with DMD can and should be assessed using the Bayley III in order to facilitate early diagnosis and thus the most appropriate early intervention strategies. Strengths of this study include incorporating multiple centers in testing and using multiple long-term follow up sessions to assess outcomes. Weaknesses/limitations of the study include attrition of subjects over time, lack of overall statistical significance, and overall small sample size.

 

 

One response to “Bayley Scale of Infant Development-III (BSID-III)”

  1. ewebb3 says:
    March 5, 2016 at 2:49 pm

    This kits seems very expensive to purchase, but it also seems like it reveals a lot of evaluative information within just 30-90 minutes. I would be interested to know how many pediatric clinicians believe that this specific kit is worth the high price (would they use it enough to justify the price?). I would also be interested to know if another scale that costs less exists with the same validity, reliability, and ease of scoring for determining developmental delays in the mentioned target populations (maybe the BOT-2 for strictly motor impairments?). Also, would a speech therapist have to co-evaluate the child with the PT in order to obtain the language impairment aspect of the scale?

Leave a Reply