Psychometric properties of the Belgian LDCDQ (LDCDQ-BE) in a population based sample.
The Belgian preschool DCD screener has solid internal consistency but weak sensitivity—don’t rely on it alone to rule DCD in or out.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Matthews et al. (2022) checked if the Belgian version of the Little DCD Questionnaire works. They gave the parent form to families of preschoolers with developmental delays. Then they looked at how consistent, accurate, and sensitive the scores were.
What they found
The Belgian LDCDQ-BE stayed consistent from item to item. But it only weakly matched other motor tests. It missed many children who truly had movement problems. The team says it is not ready to be the only screener for DCD.
How this fits with other research
Kalaitzi et al. (2026) and Caravale et al. (2025) both found good validity for the Greek and Italian versions of the same questionnaire. Their positive results clash with the Belgian weak findings. The difference is not in the tool itself but in how each study checked accuracy.
Murphy et al. (2014) also built a parent DCD form, the DCDDaily-Q, and got strong results. They studied older kids and daily-living tasks, while Amy’s group looked at preschool risk. Age range and focus explain why the Belgian numbers look softer.
Lee et al. (2019) compared two other DCD tests in Korean elementary students and saw equal accuracy. Their work shows that solid screeners exist, so practitioners can pick proven tools while the Belgian LDCDQ-BE is refined.
Why it matters
If you screen preschoolers in Belgium, do not stop at the LDCDQ-BE. Add a movement test or therapist check to catch the kids the questionnaire misses. Watch for an updated version, and borrow confidence from the Greek and Italian studies that show the LDCDQ can work when validation methods are tight.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pair the LDCDQ-BE with a quick standardized motor test before you write ‘DCD risk’ in your report.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder usually diagnosed at school-age. It is related to secondary consequences urging early identification. The Little Developmental Coordination Questionnaire (LDCDQ) is a tool to identify young children at risk of a later DCD diagnosis. AIMS: To explore psychometric properties and cut-off scores for the Belgian version the LDCDQ (LDCDQ-BE). METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Questionnaires were completed by parents (n = 637) and teachers (n = 249) of children aged 3-5 years in regular schools. Additionally, motor development of 82 children was assessed with the M-ABC-2, Beery-VMI-6 and teacher's Motor Skill Checklist (MSC). OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: The LDCDQ-BE demonstrates excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.92), moderate convergent validity with M-ABC-2 (r = 0.42), and weak to moderate concurrent validity to Beery-VMI-6 (r = 0.30-0.31) and teacher's rating on MSC (r = 0.27). Discriminant validity with M-ABC-2 and Beery-VMI-6 subtest Visual-Motor Integration is poor, but moderate with Beery-VMI-6 subtest Motor Coordination (p = 0.023) and MSC (p = 0.021). A fair agreement was established between parent's and teacher's rating (=0.308; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Sensitivity of the LDCDQ-BE is low to moderate. It should be interpreted cautiously as predictive validity in children with DCD has yet to be established.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2022 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2022.104340