Sensitivity and Specificity of the Bruininks–Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-Second Edition-Short Form in Preschool Children with Developmental Coordination Disorder

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors
Eghbal Gharaei 1
Masoumeh Shojaei 2
Afkham Daneshfar 3
1 PhD Student of Motor Behavior, Department of Physical Education and Sport of Science, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Motor Behavior, School of Physical Education and Sports Sciences, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Department of Motor Behavior, School of Physical Education and Sport of Science, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
10.22122/jrrs.v13i1.2847
Abstract
Introduction: Assessment of motor skills and the use of a suitable tool to identify children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) appear to be critical in preschool ages. Therefore the main aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-Second Edition-Short Form (BOT-2 SF), in preschool children.Materials and Methods: A total of 306 preschool children participated in this study (4-7 years). Among them, 30 children with DCD were selected. To assess the ability of the BOT-2 SF to detect DCD, we measured the sensitivity and specificity using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve method.Results: The area under ROC curve for the sensitivity and specificity were 0.91 and 0.93, respectively. In general, the area under the curve was 0.97.Conclusion: The BOT-2 SF has high sensitivity and specificity in preschoolers; therefore it can be useful in evaluating motor skills and identifying children with DCD.
Keywords
Sensitivity
Specificity
Motor proficiency
Bruininks–Oseretsky test
Developmental Coordination Disorder
  1. Missiuna C, Moll S, Law M, King S, King G. Mysteries and mazes: parents' experiences of children with developmental coordination disorder. Can J Occup Ther 2006; 73(1): 7-17.
  2. Yun J, Ulrich DA. Estimating measurement validity: A tutorial. Adapt Phys Activ Q 2002; 19(1): 32-47.
  3. Schulz J, Henderson SE, Sugden DA, Barnett AL. Structural validity of the Movement ABC-2 test: Factor structure comparisons across three age groups. Res Dev Disabil 2011; 32(4): 1361-9.
  4. Bruininks RH, Bruininks BD. Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson; 2005.
  5. Wuang YP, Su CY. Reliability and responsiveness of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-Second Edition in children with intellectual disability. Res Dev Disabil 2009; 30(5): 847-55.
  6. Barnett LM, van BE, Morgan PJ, Brooks LO, Beard JR. Gender differences in motor skill proficiency from childhood to adolescence: A longitudinal study. Res Q Exerc Sport 2010; 81(2): 162-70.
  7. Goodway JD, Robinson LE, Crowe H. Gender differences in fundamental motor skill development in disadvantaged preschoolers from two geographical regions. Res Q Exerc Sport 2010; 81(1): 17-24.
  8. Sheikh M, Safania AM, Afshari J. Effect of selected motor skills on motor development of both genders aged 5 and 6 years old. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2011; 15: 1723-5.
  9. Cairney J, Hay J, Veldhuizen S, Missiuna C, Faught BE. Comparing probable case identification of developmental coordination disorder using the short form of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency and the Movement ABC. Child Care Health Dev 2009; 35(3): 402-8.
  10. Venetsanou F, Kambas A, Aggeloussis N, Fatouros I, Taxildaris K. Motor assessment of preschool aged children: A preliminary investigation of the validity of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency - short form. Hum Mov Sci 2009; 28(4): 543-50.
  11. Vincon S, Green D, Blank R, Jenetzky E. Ecological validity of the German Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency - 2nd Edition. Hum Mov Sci 2017; 53: 45-54.
  12. MacCobb S, Greene S, Nugent K, O'Mahony P. Measurement and prediction of motor proficiency in children using Bayley infant scales and the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2005; 25(1-2): 59-79.
  13. Deitz JC, Kartin D, Kopp K. Review of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Second Edition (BOT-2). Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2007; 27(4): 87-102.
  14. Spironello C, Hay J, Missiuna C, Faught BE, Cairney J. Concurrent and construct validation of the short form of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency and the Movement-ABC when administered under field conditions: implications for screening. Child Care Health Dev 2010; 36(4): 499-507.
  15. McIntyre F, Parker H, Thornton A, Licari M, Piek J, Rigoli D, et al. Assessing motor proficiency in young adults: The Bruininks Oseretsky Test-2 Short Form and the McCarron Assessment of Neuromuscular Development. Hum Mov Sci 2017; 53: 55-62.
  16. Faught BE, Hay JA, Cairney J, Flouris A. Increased risk for coronary vascular disease in children with developmental coordination disorder. J Adolesc Health 2005; 37(5): 376-80.
  17. Ruiz LM, Graupera JL, Gutierrez M, Miyahara M. The assessment of motor coordination in children with the Movement ABC test: A comparative study among Japan, USA and Spain. International Journal of Applied Sports Sciences 2003; 15(1): 22-35.
  18. Henderson SE, Henderson SE, Barnett A. Movement Assessment Battery for Children. 2nd ed. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson; 2007.
  19. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143(1): 29-36.

Article View 11,377
PDF Download 4,061