Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (35)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ZAMAN, S. S
Right arrow Articles by DURKIN, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by ZAMAN, S. S
Right arrow Articles by DURKIN, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1990 Oxford University Press

research-article

Validity of the ‘Ten Questions’ for Screening Serious Childhood Disability: Results from Urban Bangladesh

SULTANA S ZAMAN*, NAILA Z KHAN**, SHAHEEN ISLAM*, SULTANA BANU*, SHANTA DIXIT{dagger}, PATRICK SHROUT{ddagger} and MAUREEN DURKIN{ddagger}

*Department of Psychology, University of Dhaka Bangladesh
**Wolfson Centre, Institute of Child Health London, UK
{dagger}Department of Community Medicine, Tribhuvan University Kathmandu, Nepal
{ddagger}Sergievsky Center, Columbia University 630W 168 Street, New York, NY 10032, USA

Zaman S S (Department of Psychology, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh), Khan N Z, Islam S, Banu S, Dixit S, Shrout P and Durkin M. Validity of the ‘Ten Questions’ for screening serious childhood disability: results from urban Bangladesh. International Journal of Epidemiology 1990; 19: 613–620.

A survey of 2576 children aged two to nine years was carried out in Dhaka, Bangladesh, as part of a collaborative study to test the validity of a questionnaire (the Ten Questions) for screening severe childhood disabilities in community settings. Approximately 7% of the children were positive on the screen and this rate was slightly higher in boys than girls. The sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value of the Ten Questions were perfect or nearly perfect for severe and moderate (serious) disabilities. The positive predictive value was only 22% for serious disabilities, but 70% of children classified as false positives were found to have mild disabilities or other conditions (such as ear infections) for which early detection and treatment could be beneficial. No major age or gender differences in the validity of the questionnaire were apparent, but this finding needs additional study and confirmation with studies based on larger samples. In general, the results indicate that the Ten Questions is a valid tool for screening serious disabilities in children and can potentially improve the efficiency of health services by reducing the number of children requiring attention from professionals. Future studies using the Ten Questions should foster greater attention to the dimensions of childhood disability as a public health problem in the less developed world.

Revised 1 March 1990


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Trop PediatrHome page
P. Singhi, M. Kumar, P. Malhi, and R. Kumar
Utility of the WHO Ten Questions Screen for Disability Detection in a Rural Community the North Indian Experience
J Trop Pediatr, December 1, 2007; 53(6): 383 - 387.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch. Dis. Child.Home page
A R O'Connor, T J Stephenson, A Johnson, S D Wright, M J Tobin, S Ratib, and A R Fielder
A comparison of findings on parents' and teachers' questionnaires, and detailed ophthalmic and psychological assessments
Arch. Dis. Child., September 1, 2004; 89(9): 831 - 835.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Pediatr PsycholHome page
R. Mobarak, N. Z. Khan, S. Munir, S. S. Zaman, and H. McConachie
Predictors of Stress in Mothers of Children With Cerebral Palsy in Bangladesh
J. Pediatr. Psychol., September 1, 2000; 25(6): 427 - 433.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch. Dis. Child.Home page
J. Fooks
Four key questions that identify severe disability
Arch. Dis. Child., January 1, 1999; 80(1): 67 - 68.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.