Skip to main content

Table 2 Descriptive characteristics of observational questionnaires completed by teachers

From: Psychometric properties of observational tools for identifying motor difficulties – a systematic review

Measure

Country

Age range

Studies involved

Conclusions and main findings1

ChAS-T

Israel

4–8 yrs.

Rosenblum [58]

Strengths:

-Good item consistency and concurrent validity

-Distinguishes between children with and without DCD

To be developed:

-Larger samples and wider age range

(validity and reliability studied only in age range of 5–6.5 years)

-Gender difference not studied

-No sensitivity or specificity scores

-Neither intra-rater nor test–retest reliability results

Checklist

UK

school-age children

Dussart [71]

Strength:

-The first screening instrument developed for teachers in the normal school population

To be developed:

-Sample selection and size not described

-No reliability information

-Validity studied only superficially

-Many false positives

GMRS

Netherlands

3–7 yrs.

Netelenbos [61]

Strength:

-Good reliability

To be developed:

-No sensitivity and specificity scores

M-ABC-C / M-ABC-2-C

UK

5.4–15.6 yrs.

Capistrano et al. [72]; De Milander [73]; Green et al. [67]; Junaid et al. [63]; Piek & Edwards [43]; Schoemaker et al. [25]; Schoemaker et al. [44]; Wright et al. [45]; Wright & Sugden [74]

Strengths:

-Some good test–retest reliability scores

-Translated in many countries

To be developed:

-Too long and time-consuming

-Very low sensitivity: none of the studies met the required criteria

-Inter-rater reliability not studied

MOQ-T

Netherlands

5–11 yrs.

Asunta et al. [41]; Giofre et al. [42]; Schoemaker et al. [62]

Strengths:

- Good construct validity

- Sensitivity met the criteria

- Good discriminant validity and concurrent validity

- High internal consistency

- Good sample sizes

- Both population and clinical referred samples

- Fast to fill, usability good

To be developed:

- Specificity is slightly too low

- Inter-rater and test–retest reliability not studied

TEAF

Canada

6–11 yrs.

Faught et al. [91]; Engel-Yeger et al. [16]; Rosenblum & Engel-Yeger [47]

Strengths:

- Sensitivity met the criteria

- Predicts participation preference

To be developed:

- Specificity is slightly too low

- No inter-rater or test–retest reliability scores

  1. Note. ChAS-T= Children Activity Scale for Teachers; GMRS= Gross Motor Rating Scale; M-ABC-C= Movement Assessment Battery for Children Checklist; M-ABC-2-C= Movement Assessment Battery for Children Checklist – Second Edition; MOQ-T= Motor Observation Questionnaire for Teachers; TEAF= Teacher Estimation of Activity Forms
  2. 1Conclusions and main findings are recapitulated by authors. Good sensitivity (>80%), high specificity (>90%)