Download PDF
Neuropediatrics 2023; 54(02): 147-152
DOI: 10.1055/a-1988-2544
Original Article

Make Bayley III Scores Comparable between United States and German Norms—Development of Conversion Equations

Pauline Kosmann
1   Department of Pediatrics, Paracelsus Medical University, General Hospital, Nuremberg, Germany
,
Annett Blaeser
2   Hospital for Children and Adolescents, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
,
Markus Rochow
3   Carl-Thiem-Hospital, Cottbus, Germany
,
Hon Yiu So
4   Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, United States
,
Rudolf Ascherl
2   Hospital for Children and Adolescents, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
,
Nicole Heussinger
1   Department of Pediatrics, Paracelsus Medical University, General Hospital, Nuremberg, Germany
,
Nadja Haiden
5   Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
,
Christoph Fusch
1   Department of Pediatrics, Paracelsus Medical University, General Hospital, Nuremberg, Germany
6   Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
,
Niels Rochow 
1   Department of Pediatrics, Paracelsus Medical University, General Hospital, Nuremberg, Germany
6   Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
7   Department of Pediatrics, Rostock University Medical Center, Rostock, Germany
,
on behalf of GTC Consortium › Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Aim Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Bayley-III) determines scaled scores and converts these into composite scores. It was shown that applying the German and the U.S. manual leads to different results. This study aims to systematically analyze the differences between the U.S. and German Bayley-III version and to develop conversion equations.

Methods This simulation study generated a dataset of pairs of U.S. and German Bayley-III composite scores (cognitive: n = 4,416, language: n = 240,000, motor: n = 314,000) by converting the same number of achievable tasks for 48 age groups. Bland–Altman plot and regression analyses were performed to develop conversion equations for all age groups.

Results German and US Bayley-III scores demonstrate distinct slope and interception for cognitive, language, and motor composite scores. Lower developmental performance leads to higher composite scores with U.S. norms compared with German norms (up to 15 points). These differences varied between age groups. With newly developed conversion equations, the results can be converted (R 2 > 0.98).

Interpretation This study confirms systematic differences between U.S. and German Bayley test results due to different reference cohorts. Our data consider the full age range and add conversion equations. These findings need to be acknowledged when comparing Bayley Scores internationally.

Keywords

Bayley - children - comparison - neurodevelopment

* This study was achieved in collaboration with GTC Consortium: Niels Rochow[1] [6] [7], Pauline Kosmann[1], Hon Yiu So[4], Markus Rochow[3], Erin Landau-Crangle[8], Dirk A. Wackernagel[9], Carmel T. Collins[10], Rudolf Ascherl[2], Margarita Thanhäuser[5], Zahra Khan[11], Daniel Moya[12], Dimitrios Konstantelos[13], Wolfgang, Goepel[14], Christoph Haertel[15], Mandy B. Belfort[16], Mats Blennow[9], Maria Makrides[10], Berndt Urlesberger[17], Fernando Moya[12], Mario Ruediger[13], Annett Blaeser[2], Nadja Haiden[5], Christoph Fusch[1] [6]


1 Department of Pediatrics, Paracelsus Medical University, General Hospital, Nuremberg, Germany


2 Hospital for Children and Adolescents, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany


3 Carl-Thiem-Hospital, Cottbus, Germany


4 Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, United States


5 Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria


6 Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada


7 Department of Pediatrics, Rostock University Medical Center, Rostock, Germany


8 The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada


9 Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden


10 South Australian Health & Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia


11 University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan


12 Betty Cameron Children's Hospital, Wilmington, United States


13 Department for Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care Medicine, Klinik und Poliklinik für Kinderheilkunde, Universitätsklinikum Dresden an der TU Dresden, Germany


14 University of Luebeck, Luebeck, Germany


15 University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany


16 Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, United States


17 Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria


Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 27 June 2022

Accepted: 28 November 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
28 November 2022

Article published online:
23 January 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 National Guideline Alliance (UK). Developmental follow-up of children and young people born preterm. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2017
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Steenis LJP, Verhoeven M, Hessen DJ, Van Baar AL. First steps in developing the Dutch version of the Bayley III: is the original Bayley III and its item sequence also adequate for Dutch children?. Eur J Dev Psychol 2014; 11 (04) 494-511
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Macha T, Petermann F. Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition—Deutsche Fassung. Z Für Psychiatr Psychol Psychother 2015; 63: 139-143
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bayley N. Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development: Bayley III. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Reuner G, Rosenkranz J. Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Bayley-III, Third Edition,. German Version. 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Bayley N. Scales of Infant Development: Manual. 1993
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bayley N. Scales of infant development: Manual. 1969
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Pinon M. Theoretical Background and Structure of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition. 2010. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-374177-6.10001-7
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bayley-III-NL: technische handleiding. Amsterdam:. Van Baar A, Steenis L, Verhoeven M, Hessen D. 2014
    PubMed
  • 10 Steenis LJ, Verhoeven M, Hessen DJ, van Baar AL. Performance of Dutch children on the Bayley III: a comparison study of US and Dutch norms. PLoS One 2015; 10 (08) e0132871
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Fuiko R, Oberleitner-Leeb C, Klebermass-Schrehof K, Berger A, Brandstetter S, Giordano V. The impact of norms on the outcome of children born very-preterm when using the Bayley-III: differences between US and German norms. Neonatology 2019; 116 (01) 29-36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2021
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Datta D. blandr: a Bland-Altman Method Comparison package for R. 2017 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.824514
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sharp M, DeMauro SB. Counterbalanced comparison of the BSID-II and Bayley-III at eighteen to twenty-two months corrected age. J Dev Behav Pediatr 2017; 38 (05) 322-329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Jary S, Whitelaw A, Walløe L, Thoresen M. Comparison of Bayley-2 and Bayley-3 scores at 18 months in term infants following neonatal encephalopathy and therapeutic hypothermia. Dev Med Child Neurol 2013; 55 (11) 1053-1059
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Chinta S, Walker K, Halliday R, Loughran-Fowlds A, Badawi N. A comparison of the performance of healthy Australian 3-year-olds with the standardised norms of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (version-III). Arch Dis Child 2014; 99 (07) 621-624
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Cromwell EA, Dube Q, Cole SR. et al. Validity of US norms for the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-III in Malawian children. Eur J Paediatr Neurol 2014; 18 (02) 223-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Yu YT, Hsieh WS, Hsu CH. et al. A psychometric study of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development—3rd Edition for term and preterm Taiwanese infants. Res Dev Disabil 2013; 34: 3875-3883
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Anderson PJ, Burnett A. Assessing developmental delay in early childhood—concerns with the Bayley-III scales. Clin Neuropsychol 2017; 31 (02) 371-381
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Anderson PJ, De Luca CR, Hutchinson E, Roberts G, Doyle LW. Victorian Infant Collaborative Group. Underestimation of developmental delay by the new Bayley-III Scale. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2010; 164 (04) 352-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Aylward GP, Aylward BS. The changing yardstick in measurement of cognitive abilities in infancy. J Dev Behav Pediatr 2011; 32 (06) 465-468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Aylward G, Zhu J. The Bayley Scales: clarification for clinicians and researchers. NCS Pearson, Inc. 2019
    PubMedGoogle Scholar