69 and specificity of 0.93 [17]. The health visitors were asked to record other information, including but not limited to the following. Any existing medical problems with the Palbociclib child or other family members. For the sake of brevity, this question did not go into further detail so items were recorded entirely at the discretion of the health visitor. Details of service provision to date.HPI (health plan indicator) status [25]; each child is assigned by the health visitor to Core, Additional, or Intensive status which indicates the level of continued contact needed. For most Scottish children, the HPI status would have been allocated in the first year of life and not reconsidered thereafter [26]. Children assigned to the Core category would not normally be seen by the health visitor on a planned routine basis.

Details of who lives with the child.No more detailed examination of the child was performed on a routine basis.The data collection sheet is provided in Appendix A. Information collected from these contacts along with Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) rankings for the datazones of residence of the family [27] were collated for analysis. SIMD is an area-based measure of deprivation referenced to the whole Scottish population: Glasgow has a relatively high level of deprivation and about half of our sample is in the most deprived Scottish SIMD quintile. This study used SIMD data from 2009, the year of data collection. Health visitors were able to insert free text on the data collection sheet including, in some cases and at their discretion, whether the family used more than one language at home.

The potential predictor variables that we used in our analyses thus correspond to those that a health visitor might reasonably be expected to be able to access for Carfilzomib a child who had not been seen since infancy.2.1. Statistical AnalysisDisagreement with the ��can your child say at least fifty words�� statement was used to represent presence of language delay. All the children reported to be unable to make two-word utterances were also reported as being unable to say 50 words.Thirteen potential predictor variables for language delay which were potentially available to the health visitor could feasibly have been known before the 30-month contact. They include demographic, service use and personal and family medical history and are listed in Appendix B. Univariate associations were tested using Fisher’s exact tests. Those variables that showed some evidence (P < 0.1) of association with language delay were entered into a multiple logistic regression model, and a backward stepwise procedure was used to derive a model including only those factors showing an independent association with language delay at a 5% significance level.