In brief
- The Shoaib Sensorimotor Development Tool (SSDT) is a 72-item assessment that measures sensorimotor development across nine domains — gross motor, fine motor, sensory, tone, balance, gait, reflexes, social interaction, and speech.
- It was developed and validated in a 2025 study published in Annals of King Edward Medical University. The validation used two samples: 150 mothers of typically developing children aged 3 to 7 for an exploratory factor analysis, and 300 mothers for a separate confirmatory factor analysis. Seventy-five constructs were analysed initially and three were removed for cross-loading, leaving the final 72.
- The SSDT is one of three primary outcome measures in the completed clinical trial comparing DMI to the Bobath approach (NCT07238634), alongside the GMFM-88 and the Trunk Impairment Scale.
- The tool was validated only on typically developing children, which means its measurement properties in children with cerebral palsy are not yet established. This is an important limitation for interpreting the trial results.
- Understanding what the SSDT measures helps you read the trial results more carefully and ask better questions about how progress was evaluated.
The Shoaib Sensorimotor Development Tool appears on this site as one of three primary outcome measures in the completed clinical trial comparing DMI and the Bobath approach. Unlike the GMFM-88 and the Trunk Impairment Scale, it was developed recently and is less widely known. This post explains what the SSDT is, how it was validated, and what its strengths and limitations mean for reading the trial results.
What is the Shoaib Sensorimotor Development Tool?
The Shoaib Sensorimotor Development Tool (SSDT) is a standardized assessment designed to evaluate sensorimotor development in children aged 3 to 7 years. It was developed by Shoaib Waqas, Ashfaq Ahmad, Juliana Barbosa Goulardins, Asif Hanif, Muhammad Tariq, and Atiqa Niamat, and published in 2025 in Annals of King Edward Medical University (Lahore, Pakistan), volume 31, issue 3.
The tool contains 72 items (referred to as constructs in the validation study) organized into nine domains that span motor function, sensory processing, and developmental milestones. The goal was to create a single instrument that captures sensorimotor development holistically rather than requiring separate assessments for motor skills, reflexes, and social interaction.
The nine domains
The SSDT covers a broader range of function than a purely motor assessment. Its nine domains are:
Gross motor
Large-scale body movements such as rolling, sitting, crawling, standing, and walking.
Fine motor
Small-scale movements involving the hands and fingers, such as grasping, transferring objects, and using tools.
Sensory
Responses to sensory input including visual, auditory, tactile, and proprioceptive stimuli.
Tone
Muscle tone assessment — whether the child's resting muscle tension is within a typical range.
Balance
Static and dynamic balance, including the ability to maintain postures and shift weight.
Gait
Walking pattern, step quality, and the ability to navigate different surfaces.
Reflexes
Primitive reflex integration and the presence or absence of typical developmental reflexes.
Social interaction
The child's engagement with others, including eye contact, responsiveness, and reciprocal interaction.
Speech
Vocalization, expressive language, and articulation appropriate to the child's age.
How was it validated?
The validation study was a cross-sectional psychometric study using two samples. An exploratory factor analysis drew on 150 mothers of typically developing children aged 3 to 7, of whom 144 completed the assessment. A separate confirmatory factor analysis used 300 mothers, of whom 288 completed it. Seventy-five constructs were analysed initially and three were removed for cross-loading, leaving the final 72. Mothers completed the SSDT as a parent-report questionnaire. The model fit indices come from the confirmatory analysis.
Exploratory factor analysis confirmed that all 72 items loaded onto a single factor called "sensorimotor development," which explained 84.3 percent of the variance (eigenvalue of 3.897). The model fit indices were strong: CFI = 0.983, GFI = 0.962, TLI = 0.989, SRMR = 0.0325, and RMSEA = 0.076. The SSDT demonstrated excellent internal consistency, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.963. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was 0.992, and Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant (p < 0.001).
In plain terms, the validation study found that the SSDT items hang together as a coherent measure of sensorimotor development, that internal consistency across items was high, and that the sample was adequate for the statistical methods used. Stability of scores when the same child is assessed twice was not tested.
What the SSDT adds to the DMI trial
The DMI clinical trial (NCT07238634) used three primary outcome measures, each measuring a different aspect of function. The GMFM-88 measures gross motor skills. The Trunk Impairment Scale measures trunk control specifically. The SSDT adds coverage of areas neither of the other two includes: fine motor skills, sensory responsiveness, muscle tone, reflexes, social interaction, and speech.
This is unusual but potentially valuable. Most pediatric therapy trials for cerebral palsy measure motor outcomes only. By including the SSDT, the trial investigators chose to look at whether DMI produces changes beyond motor function — in sensory processing, tone, social engagement, and communication. If the results show improvements on the SSDT in the DMI group compared to the Bobath group, that would be information no purely motor assessment could provide.
The validation study collected data through mothers completing the tool about their children, but the paper also reports that the SSDT takes an average of 21 minutes to complete and that administration is feasible for trained therapists after a brief workshop. It is therefore designed for both parent report and therapist administration. What the trial registration does not specify is which of the two the trial used, and that is worth noting when the results appear, since the two methods can produce different results.
Important limitations to understand
The SSDT was validated only on typically developing children. The 150 children in the validation study were developing typically — none had cerebral palsy, Down syndrome, or any other diagnosed condition. This means the tool's measurement properties (reliability, validity, sensitivity to change) in children with CP are not established. A tool that works well for typically developing children does not automatically work the same way for children with motor delays.
The age range of the validation study (3 to 7 years) does not fully cover the trial population. The DMI trial enrolled children ages 2 to 4. Children aged 2 are below the age range for which the SSDT was validated, so the tool's performance in that age group is unknown.
The tool is not yet PubMed-indexed. As of August 2026, the validation study has not appeared in PubMed, which means it has not yet gone through the indexing process that Medline-listed journals require. This does not mean the study is invalid, but it means the standard bibliographic check is not yet available, and the journal's standing and peer-review process may be harder to verify than for a Medline-indexed publication.
The study was based on parent report, not direct child assessment. Mothers completed the questionnaire about their children. Parent-report measures are a legitimate method of assessment, but they can differ from direct clinician observation, particularly for domains like tone and reflexes where a parent's judgment may not match a trained therapist's.
What this means for reading the trial results
When the DMI trial results are published, three questions about the SSDT data are worth asking:
- How was the SSDT administered — as a parent-report questionnaire or as a therapist-scored assessment? The tool supports both methods, so the answer affects how the results should be interpreted.
- Did the SSDT detect differences between the DMI and Bobath groups that the GMFM-88 and TIS did not? The SSDT covers domains the other two measures do not, so detecting change there would be genuinely new information.
- Were the 2-year-old participants included in the SSDT analysis, or were they excluded from that measure because they fell below the validated age range? How the researchers handled this matters for whether the findings apply to younger children.
None of these limitations invalidate the trial or the tool. But they give you the context to evaluate the results fairly — which is exactly what this site aims to help you do.
What you can do with this information
The SSDT is a research tool, not something you can request for your child from a typical Idaho clinic. It was developed for a study context and is not yet available for clinical use in the way the GMFM-88 or GMFCS are.
What you can do is use the framework it represents. If a provider tells you their approach improves your child's motor skills, it is a reasonable follow-up to ask: "Does it also affect sensory processing, tone, reflexes, social engagement, or communication?" The SSDT reflects the idea that motor development and sensorimotor development are not the same thing, and that a complete picture requires looking at more than walking and standing. That question is worth asking whether or not you have a specific assessment tool to answer it.
Where it appears on this site
The SSDT is referenced in our cerebral palsy guide as one of the three primary outcome measures in the completed DMI clinical trial. If you are reading that page and the trial results when they appear, you now know what the SSDT measures and what it does not.
Sources
- Waqas S, Ahmad A, Goulardins JB, Hanif A, Tariq M, Niamat A. Development and Validation of Shoaib Sensorimotor Development Tool for Normal Pediatric Population. Annals of King Edward Medical University. 2025;31(3). Full text (PDF)
- ClinicalTrials.gov. Effects of DMI vs Bobath on Neuromuscular Development in CP (NCT07238634). ClinicalTrials.gov
- Waqas S, Ahmad A. Shoaib Sensorimotor Development Tool. ResearchGate. ResearchGate profile
Nothing here is medical advice, and no single assessment or tool should change your child's care on its own. Discuss anything you read here with your child's pediatrician or therapist.