Dataset Information

Structural validity of the Norwegian version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in children aged 3-6 years.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This study examined the structural validity of the teacher-report Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in Norwegian preschoolers aged 3-6 years. We tested the original five-factor structure, the five-factor structure with two broader second-order factors, and a three-factor structure, all suggested in the literature. Since the positively worded items in SDQ have been shown to introduce noise, we also examined all three structures with a positive construal method factor for these items.

Methods

Preschool teachers from 43 preschools completed the SDQ questionnaire for 1,142 children [48% girls, mean age 4.3 (SD 0.9) years]. Confirmatory factor analyses were used to estimate and compare the six models. Measurement invariance was tested across sex (multi-group approach) and age (multiple-indicator multiple-cause approach).

Results

The original five-factor structure of SDQ was supported, where the model fit improved when including a method factor for positively worded items. Both models showed scalar invariance across sex and age. The second-order and the three-factor structures were not supported.

Conclusion

We recommend using the original five-factor structure when using SDQ for both clinical and research purposes in young children and adding a method factor when using structural equation modeling.

SUBMITTER: Aadland KN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9795199 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Structural validity of the Norwegian version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in children aged 3-6 years.

Aadland Katrine Nyvoll KN Lervåg Arne A Ommundsen Yngvar Y Aadland Eivind E

Frontiers in psychology 20221214

<h4>Introduction</h4>This study examined the structural validity of the teacher-report Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in Norwegian preschoolers aged 3-6 years. We tested the original five-factor structure, the five-factor structure with two broader second-order factors, and a three-factor structure, all suggested in the literature. Since the positively worded items in SDQ have been shown to introduce noise, we also examined all three structures with a positive construal method fac ...[more]

PMID: 36591042

Similar Datasets

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.

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.

Dataset Information

Structural validity of the Norwegian version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in children aged 3-6 years.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Structural validity of the Norwegian version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in children aged 3-6 years.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets