Dataset Information

How reliable and valid is the teacher version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in primary school children?

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is validated for parents, but not yet for teachers in a broad age range of children. We conducted a cross-sectional study with 4-10 years old school children to investigate if the SDQ-T can be used instead of the validated but lengthy Teacher's Report Form (TRF) to acquire information about emotional and behavioral problems in the school community.

Methods

Teachers of 453 children from primary schools were approached. Teachers of 394 children (response rate 86.9%) with a mean age of 7.1 years filled in the SDQ-T (n = 387), the TRF (n = 349) or both (n = 342). We assessed reliability by calculating internal consistency and concurrent validity (using correlation coefficients, sensitivity, specificity) of the SDQ-T compared with the TRF.

Results

Internal consistency of the SDQ-T Total Difficulties Score (SDQ-T TDS; Cronbach ? = 0.80), hyperactivity/ inattention- (? = 0.86) and prosocial behavior (? = 0.81) was very good. Concurrent validity demonstrated a strong correlation of all subscales of the SDQ-T with the corresponding scale on the TRF (range 0.54-0.73), except for peer problems (0.46). Using a SDQ-T TDS cut-off score > 14, the SDQ-T had a good sensitivity (90%) and specificity (94%).

Discussion

The good reliability, validity and brevity of the SDQ-T make it an easily applicable questionnaire for obtaining information about emotional and behavioral problems from teachers in primary school children.

SUBMITTER: van den Heuvel M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5409073 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How reliable and valid is the teacher version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in primary school children?

van den Heuvel Meta M Jansen Danielle E M C DEMC Stewart Roy E RE Smits-Engelsman Bouwien C M BCM Reijneveld Sijmen A SA Flapper Boudien C T BCT

PloS one 20170428 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is validated for parents, but not yet for teachers in a broad age range of children. We conducted a cross-sectional study with 4-10 years old school children to investigate if the SDQ-T can be used instead of the validated but lengthy Teacher's Report Form (TRF) to acquire information about emotional and behavioral problems in the school community.<h4>Methods</h4>Teachers of 453 children from primary schools were approached. ...[more]

PMID: 28453573

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChild and adolescent mental health problems are urgent health issues in low- and middle-income countries. To promote child and adolescent mental health services, simple validated screening tools are helpful. In Mongolia, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), an internationally used child and adolescent mental health screening tool for children aged 4-17, was translated but not yet validated. To use the questionnaire appropriately, validation is necessary.MethodsChildren at 4th year at elementary school (community sample) and children visited psychiatric outpatient service (clinical sample) were recruited and their parental version of the SDQ was compared. The discriminating ability of the parental version of the SDQ was examined using Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis on the SDQ total difficulties score. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was used as a measure. Cut-off score was determined by normative banding that categorizes children with the highest 10% score range as abnormal and the second highest 10% as borderline following the original method; this cut-off score was compared with the cut-off score candidates with good balance between sensitivity and specificity using ROC analysis.ResultsWe included 2301 children in the community sample, and 429 children in the clinical sample. Mean age was 9.7 years (SD 0.4, range 8.3-12.0) among the community sample and 10.4 years (SD 3.8, range 4.0-17.8) among the clinical sample. The mean total difficulties score was 12.9 (SD 4.8) among the community sample and 20.4 (SD 6.2) among the clinical sample. A total of 88.8% of the community sample and 98.8% of the clinical sample answered the SDQ. Using ROC analysis, the AUC was 0.82 (95% confident interval 0.80-0.85), which meant moderate discriminating ability. Using normative banding, the borderline cut-off score was 16/17 and abnormal cut-off score was 19/20. For cut-off scores of 16/17 and 19/20, sensitivity was 71.9 and 53.8% and specificity was 78.5 and 90.5%, respectively. The cut-off score candidates by ROC analysis were 16/17 and 17/18.ConclusionsThe parental version of the SDQ had moderate discriminating ability among Mongolian school-age children. For the screening of mental health problems among community children, cut-off score of 16/17 is recommended.

Project description:BackgroundThe 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.MethodA 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionThe 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.

Dataset Information

How reliable and valid is the teacher version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in primary school children?

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

How reliable and valid is the teacher version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in primary school children?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets