Aim: To investigate whether standardized motor development screening and assessment tools that are used to evaluate motor abilities of children aged 0 to 2 years are valid in cultures other than those in which the normative sample was established.
Method: This was a systematic review in which six databases were searched. Studies were selected based on inclusion/exclusion criteria and appraised for evidence level and quality. Study variables were extracted.
Results: Twenty-three studies representing six motor development screening and assessment tools in 16 cultural contexts met the inclusion criteria: Alberta Infant Motor Scale (n=7), Ages and Stages Questionnaire, 3rd edition (n=2), Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, 3rd edition (n=8), Denver Developmental Screening Test, 2nd edition (n=4), Harris Infant Neuromotor Test (n=1), and Peabody Developmental Motor Scales, 2nd edition (n=1). Thirteen studies found significant differences between the cultural context and normative sample. Two studies established reliability and/or validity of standardized motor development assessments in high-risk infants from different cultural contexts. Five studies established new population norms. Eight studies described the cross-cultural adaptation of a standardized motor development assessment.
Interpretation: Standardized motor development assessments have limited validity in cultures other than that in which the normative sample was established. Their use can result in under- or over-referral for services.
© 2016 Mac Keith Press.