期刊
CHILD AND ADOLESCENT MENTAL HEALTH
卷 13, 期 3, 页码 140-147出版社
WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-3588.2007.00461.x
关键词
Screening efficiency; systematic review; mental health assessment
Objective: Assess the screening efficiency of the caretaker-report CBCL and SDQ in community and clinical samples using published data. Methods: PyschInfo, Medline, and EMBASE were systematically searched to identify studies with appropriate efficiency data. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity were extracted from identified studies and used to generate summary likelihood ratio estimates on which the scales were compared. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated with respect to a 'true' diagnosis to compare scales. Results: A total of 29 and 3 studies met inclusion criteria for CBCL and SDQ respectively. Summary estimates of the likelihood ratios for domains assessed by CBCL ranged from 3.86 (2.23, 6.69) to 4.87 (2.90, 8.18); and for SDQ from 5.02 (1.61, 15.63) to 8.32 (2.72, 25.48). Heterogeneity was low. For total problems, the SDQ caretaker-report was found to be most specific (0.93, 95% CI 0.92, 0.94) and the CBCL caretaker-report to be most sensitive (0.66, 95% CI 0.60, 0.73). Conclusions: This meta-analysis supports continued use of the CBCL and SDQ via caretaker-report in clinical and community samples. Additional research is required to determine if there is a true difference in efficiency between the two scales.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据