Journal
PLOS ONE
Volume 14, Issue 6, Pages -Publisher
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218518
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East Midlands (CLAHRC-EM) [IS-CLA-0113-10014]
- NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre
- NIHR MindTech MedTech Co-operative
- National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR) [IS-CLA-0113-10014] Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR)
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Background The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is widely used to assess child and adolescent mental health problems. However, the factor structure of the SDQ is subject to debate and there is limited evidence investigating measurement equivalence invariance (ME/I) between treatment groups, informants, and across time. Method A randomised controlled trial (RCT) recruited 250 participants (6-17 years) who had been referred for an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) assessment. Participants and their clinician either received or did not receive a QbTest report (computer task measuring attention, impulsivity and activity). Parents and teachers completed the SDQ at baseline and 6-months later. This study aimed to understand the factor structure of the SDQ in a clinic referred ADHD sample, and validate the scale as a screening/diagnostic aide and as a measure of treatment outcome both in clinical and research settings. Exploratory Structural Equation Modelling (ESEM) was performed to examine the factor structure, and ME/I was assessed between treatment groups, informants, and time points. The criterion validity of the SDQ predictive algorithm for ADHD was compared with clinician and research diagnoses using logistic regression and tests of diagnostic accuracy. Results A 5-factor structure provided the best fit with strong factorial invariance between treatment groups and across time points, but not across informants (parent and teacher ratings). SDQ ratings of 'probable' hyperactivity disorder were good predictors of clinical (OR = 10.20, 95% CI 2.18-48.71, p = 0.003) and research diagnoses of ADHD (OR = 6.82, 95% CI 1.95-23.84, p = 0.003), and research diagnoses of Hyperkinetic disorder (OR = 4.02, 95% CI 1.13-14.25, p = 0.031). Further examination of the SDQ hyperactivity 'probable' rating showed good specificity (84.5%-74.5%) but poor sensitivity (45.0-42.5%) for ADHD. Conclusion The findings indicate the SDQ is a valid outcome measure for use in RCTs and clinical settings. However, care should be taken when using the SDQ predictive algorithm to screen for ADHD in clinically referred samples.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available